if 26 ratify and Ireland dont, theyll probably find ways to get through cos the ECJ (EU Court Justice) wont make a decision thatd throw the future of the EU in doubt (if EU tries to leave Ireland behind- itd be a violation of EU law, but EU law is ridiculously complicated & the ECJ is ridiculously unpredicitable in its decisions.......
and they wanted us to vote on something that was even MORE complicated and that's not because I'm ignorant or stupid... it was a ridiculous document and is open to all kinds of interpretation.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
the treaty might take away the decision from the irish peolple to directly decide about their neutrality, and thus they have a good right to be against it. yet, condemning the whole piece of work as an attempt to enslave europe in the interest of big business is delirious.
for europe as a whole the treaty strengthens (representative) democracy as it gives more power to the european parliament which, comparable to national parliaments, consists of elected representatives from each EU country that are voted for by every eu citizen. formerly the european commision and council, which are not democratically elected (in their function for europe) had the major say in european policy which in great parts happened outside the public eye.
i don't see how this is the evil monstrum that people try to evoke here.
smaller countries are given more votes than they would have relative to their population. there need to be a certain number of countries for vetos. this is the only way to ensure that one or two single countries can't bring the decision making process to a complete stop out of self interest. yet there is a sufficient possibility for countries to oppose to policies in a coalition (democracy at its best)
if, in consequence of the irish rejection of the document, the decision is made
to start afresh with a smaller number of countries that are willing to engange in a more advanced integration. both groups of countries are perfectly respected.
the eu never a tool to make farming or getting to PJ concerts easier as people have pointed out elsewhere. it started as an economic cooperation mainly between france and germany that now has expanded to incluce countries in the (former) european periphery like portigal, greece, ireland, poland, or estonia for MUTUAL benefit. that those countries (some more than others) after centuries of warfare and economic battles try to get closer also in social and legislative matters is a step i most warmly welcome.
I am not an economist and neither am working for a big company but people need to stop blaming economic interests for all the wrongs in the world. sheer economic cooperation can be and often is the starting points also for a closer social interaction. there always has to be something in it for people to get in contact.
m.
Godwin's Law:
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
the treaty might take away the decision from the irish peolple to directly decide about their neutrality, and thus they have a good right to be against it. yet, condemning the whole piece of work as an attempt to enslave europe in the interest of big business is delirious. .
where are you getting that idea from? Nobody suggested that... although Lisbon left the POSSIBILITY of that happening. Like a lot of the scaremongering stuff on the no side... it's highly doubtful it will happen but who knows what state the world will be in in 20 years time and who's in charge.
for europe as a whole the treaty strengthens (representative) democracy as it gives more power to the european parliament which, comparable to national parliaments, consists of elected representatives from each EU country that are voted for by every eu citizen. formerly the european commision and council, which are not democratically elected (in their function for europe) had the major say in european policy which in great parts happened outside the public eye..
Yes I know how it works... but I think we're seeing a HUGE lack of respect for democracy in play right now.
i don't see how this is the evil monstrum that people try to evoke here.
smaller countries are given more votes than they would have relative to their population. there need to be a certain number of countries for vetos. this is the only way to ensure that one or two single countries can't bring the decision making process to a complete stop out of self interest. yet there is a sufficient possibility for countries to oppose to policies in a coalition (democracy at its best).
Hmm... forget about opposing and vetos... it also makes it easier for a few of the bigger countries to just get a couple of little countries onside and run away with the whole thing themselves. See there are too many gaps... too many problems with this treaty!
f, in consequence of the irish rejection of the document, the decision is made
to start afresh with a smaller number of countries that are willing to engange in a more advanced integration. both groups of countries are perfectly respected..
So we split europe? Simply cos the people didn't like the 'advancements' they were putting forth? That's ridiculous.
the eu never a tool to make farming or getting to PJ concerts easier as people have pointed out elsewhere. it started as an economic cooperation mainly between france and germany that now has expanded to incluce countries in the (former) european periphery like portigal, greece, ireland, poland, or estonia for MUTUAL benefit. that those countries (some more than others) after centuries of warfare and economic battles try to get closer also in social and legislative matters is a step i most warmly welcome.
I am not an economist and neither am working for a big company but people need to stop blaming economic interests for all the wrongs in the world. sheer economic cooperation can be and often is the starting points also for a closer social interaction. there always has to be something in it for people to get in contact.
m.
See that's where we split. The economic cooperation and trading bloc and the reasons the EU was set up really was a great idea... and it still is. But they're asking us to vote for a completely different Europe here. Even the States of America get to choose their own taxes! We'd be handing way too much power over to politicians.... and I simply do not believe there is any need for it.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
See that's where we split. The economic cooperation and trading bloc and the reasons the EU was set up really was a great idea... and it still is. But they're asking us to vote for a completely different Europe here. Even the States of America get to choose their own taxes! We'd be handing way too much power over to politicians.... and I simply do not believe there is any need for it.
yes, but some countries want to go beyond that...why would you stop them if others WANT to join them. the irish aren't forced to do it.
m.
Godwin's Law:
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Hmm... forget about opposing and vetos... it also makes it easier for a few of the bigger countries to just get a couple of little countries onside and run away with the whole thing themselves. See there are too many gaps... too many problems with this treaty!
and if the smaller countries get together they can impose stuff on bigger countries. that's the way it works. right now nothing works, because if one country says it doesn't want to go along, nothing happens.
and the treaty even allows countries not to implement rulings they reject. there is still room for countries to make individual policies. maybe less than before, but that's not necessarily bad as long as I can still influence it with my vote.
that's just what I'm talking about. if not every one wants to work together more closely some will and some won't.
europe has always been split. Norway, Switzerland, Serbia, Croatia, Ukraine...all not in the EU, yet european countries...and you said elsewhere that you didn't understand why those eastern countries had to join, so what kind of split is the right one for you....west and east, rich and poor??
I rather go with working together and not working together...
m.
Godwin's Law:
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
yes, but some countries want to go beyond that...why would you stop them if others WANT to join them. the irish aren't forced to do it.
m.
but how do we know if they want to or not? Britain WILL ratify the treaty, yet a poll last week showed if a referendum were held, it would be defeated 50% to 21%. There's nothing democratic about Brown going ahead against those figures. If I felt Europe DID want this I would say so... but the Brits, the Dutch and the French certainly do NOT want it. The French and Dutch spoke and were ignored, the brits will not get a chance to speak
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
and if the smaller countries get together they can impose stuff on bigger countries. that's the way it works. right now nothing works, because if one country says it doesn't want to go along, nothing happens.
what do you mean nothing happens? Things stay the same... but the EU has plenty of power as it is. Sure they're always giving us slaps on the wrist over this and over that... there's plenty they can do and are doing.
and the treaty even allows countries not to implement rulings they reject. there is still room for countries to make individual policies. maybe less than before, but that's not necessarily bad as long as I can still influence it with my vote.
that's just what I'm talking about. if not every one wants to work together more closely some will and some won't.
Yes, but as I've said before... look at the bullying that goes on. The Irish government are not as strong minded as the collective Irish people... if France were to make threats over our tax breaks and suggest punishing us in some other way, there's NO doubt in my mind that our government would give in.
europe has always been split. Norway, Switzerland, Serbia, Croatia, Ukraine...all not in the EU, yet european countries...and you said elsewhere that you didn't understand why those eastern countries had to join, so what kind of split is the right one for you....west and east, rich and poor??
I rather go with working together and not working together...
m.
What? where did I say that? I've NO problem with enlargement... I never said that anywhere... we voted for that in Nice... which I voted YES to by the way. I understand completely why they'd want to join and why we should let them. That's never been an issue for me anyway... and we did already vote on that so I doubt it was an issue for anyone else either.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
yes, but some countries want to go beyond that...why would you stop them if others WANT to join them. the irish aren't forced to do it.
m.
I keep hearing this assumption from pro-euros, that the other countries WANT it.
If by referendum every country had said yes there would be no real issue to argue.
Had the Irish not had their referendum guaranteed in their constitution, their parties made it clear they would have been forced to.
I keep hearing this assumption from pro-euros, that the other countries WANT it.
If by referendum every country had said yes there would be no real issue to argue.
Had the Irish not had their referendum guaranteed in their constitution, their parties made it clear they would have been forced to.
We're pretty much the only country who weren't forced into anything
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
We're pretty much the only country who weren't forced into anything
you were forced to have a referendum
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Nobody said if I didn't vote I'd have no dinner for a week
So nope, I wasn't. Me personally, I was not forced into either decision... unlike at LEAST some of the governments of the 26 other countries.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
what do you mean nothing happens? Things stay the same... but the EU has plenty of power as it is. Sure they're always giving us slaps on the wrist over this and over that... there's plenty they can do and are doing.
two little ironies that I heard on the news just now:
a)without the treaty in the next phase of legislature one country of the 27 cannot be in the european council.
who decides which one?
is that democratic?
b) without the treaty next year after the eu parliament election germany will have more representatives than were planned under the treaty
besides: I don't think referendums are the answer here. people elected their parliaments. there are parties in every country that are contra-eu or contra-a-closer-eu. they can be voted for in secret and democratic elections.
in poland for example they were in power for a while.
again: with referendums neither germany nor france would have a commen currency, the eastern countries wouldn't be in the eu, and there sure as well wouldn't be open borders...
m.
Godwin's Law:
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
two little ironies that I heard on the news just now:
a)without the treaty in the next phase of legislature one country of the 27 cannot be in the european council.
who decides which one?
is that democratic?
b) without the treaty next year after the eu parliament election germany will have more representatives than were planned under the treaty
besides: I don't think referendums are the answer here. people elected their parliaments. there are parties in every country that are contra-eu or contra-a-closer-eu. they can be voted for in secret and democratic elections.
in poland for example they were in power for a while.
again: with referendums neither germany nor france would have a commen currency, the eastern countries wouldn't be in the eu, and there sure as well wouldn't be open borders...
m.
And I keep telling you, referendums have to be the answer in Ireland. It's in our Constitution - without a referendum, the Treaty would be illegal.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
besides: I don't think referendums are the answer here. people elected their parliaments. there are parties in every country that are contra-eu or contra-a-closer-eu. they can be voted for in secret and democratic elections.
in poland for example they were in power for a while.
the UK elected a party who had as a major part of their manifesto the promise of a referendum. Ye ye treaty constitution, untrustworthy backdoor crap.
again: with referendums neither germany nor france would have a commen currency, the eastern countries wouldn't be in the eu, and there sure as well wouldn't be open borders...
m.
i know best presumption that makes people distrust government and those that love them.
And I keep telling you, referendums have to be the answer in Ireland. It's in our Constitution - without a referendum, the Treaty would be illegal.
and I keep repeating that I know that. but people here continue refering to it as undemocratic if OTHER countries don't have referendums. a ratification by an elected parliament can be and is just as democratic as a referendum. the latter doesn't have 80units of democracy and the other only 65units of democracy...
m.
Godwin's Law:
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
the UK elected a party who had as a major part of their manifesto the promise of a referendum. Ye ye treaty constitution, untrustworthy backdoor crap.
i know best presumption that makes people distrust government and those that love them.
well, that's representative democracy...you are free to reject it, not go to vote, and organise referendums for every matter that you are interested in.
and I don't understand what you mean by your last statement, sorry.
m.
Godwin's Law:
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
and I keep repeating that I know that. but people here continue refering to it as undemocratic if OTHER countries don't have referendums. a ratification by an elected parliament can be and is just as democratic as a referendum. the latter doesn't have 80units of democracy and the other only 65units of democracy...
m.
Well, France and Holland rejected the EU Constitution a few years back. This time, they reworded it so that the government could decide for them - Sarkozy even admitted that it would have been rejected again if it had gone to the people. Doesn't exactly scream democracy, does it?
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
Well, France and Holland rejected the EU Constitution a few years back. This time, they reworded it so that the government could decide for them - Sarkozy even admitted that it would have been rejected again if it had gone to the people. Doesn't exactly scream democracy, does it?
Sarkozy was elected by the majority of French people, wasn't he?
They could have gone with Le Pen if they wanted a different(=no) eu.
The French are to blame, just as the americans are to blame for electing Bush (the second time at least;)).
m.
Godwin's Law:
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Well, France and Holland rejected the EU Constitution a few years back. This time, they reworded it so that the government could decide for them - Sarkozy even admitted that it would have been rejected again if it had gone to the people. Doesn't exactly scream democracy, does it?
but the again, the sovereign French people elected by majority Nicholas Sarkozy as their president knowing full well about his position re: Lisbon Treaty.
but the again, the sovereign French people elected by majority Nicholas Sarkozy as their president knowing full well about his position re: Lisbon Treaty.
first one!
Godwin's Law:
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Hmmm... So what exactly is the problem with implementing a treaty that will most probably be ratified by 26 out of 27 countries? Ireland's vote would be respected, since the new measures wouldn't apply to Ireland.
I don't think it's particularly fair for one single country to stop this from happening for 26 others.
Maybe I'm missing something, but Ireland's 'No' would be bypassed how exactly? Again, the article clearly states that only countries who ratify the treaty would implement those measures. Ireland would NOT be affected.
well, that's representative democracy...you are free to reject it, not go to vote, and organise referendums for every matter that you are interested in.
and I don't understand what you mean by your last statement, sorry.
m.
You obviously didnt understand the first statement either, but i cant be arsed with any of it to be honest. You heart government, for your own reasons. i don't trust them because their actions are untrustworthy to me. thats about as far as we're going to get.
You obviously didnt understand the first statement either, but i cant be arsed with any of it to be honest. You heart government, for your own reasons. i don't trust them because their actions are untrustworthy to me. thats about as far as we're going to get.
Free to reject it! good one.
i understood very well (your first statement). and my answer is. get active and organize referendums about issues you are interested in. it's possible, at least on a local level...
m.
Godwin's Law:
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
i understood very well (your first statement). and my answer is. get active and organize referendums about issues you are interested in. it's possible, at least on a local level...
and I don't "heart" government. but I don't see how 80+ million people can live without one...but let's not get off topic...you seem fairly angry to me anyway...but that's just me...
m.
Godwin's Law:
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Well, for one thing, the fact that they had already voted down the Constitution means that even the introduction of the Lisbon Treaty, as if it's some completely different idea, is pretty undemocratic.
And are the Irish the last ones left who think an elected government should still represent the wishes of the people, rather than their own wishes?
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
two little ironies that I heard on the news just now:
a)without the treaty in the next phase of legislature one country of the 27 cannot be in the european council.
who decides which one?
is that democratic?
b) without the treaty next year after the eu parliament election germany will have more representatives than were planned under the treaty
besides: I don't think referendums are the answer here. people elected their parliaments. there are parties in every country that are contra-eu or contra-a-closer-eu. they can be voted for in secret and democratic elections.
in poland for example they were in power for a while.
again: with referendums neither germany nor france would have a commen currency, the eastern countries wouldn't be in the eu, and there sure as well wouldn't be open borders...
m.
I'd say that one country is already chosen and that's a pile of bollox... I'm sure they can change that easily without blaming the treaty and our no vote.
See... I think we've seen enough examples of dictatorships throughout the world to prove that we cannot put the power solely in the hands of governments. Do we not learn anything?
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Well, for one thing, the fact that they had already voted down the Constitution means that even the introduction of the Lisbon Treaty, as if it's some completely different idea, is pretty undemocratic.
And are the Irish the last ones left who think an elected government should still represent the wishes of the people, rather than their own wishes?
why on earth would that be undemocratic??!!?!
indeed, they took on board what the people said with their NO vote and reworked the treaty taking into account all the member states concerns, via the EU parliament, lobby groups [including citizens], the Council, the EU Commision.
BTW, any government is made up of people, i.e. representives, that the majority of voters have chosen.
There isn't just direct democracy [like you had in Ancient Greece] but there's also the concept of parliamentary representative democracy.
And are the Irish the last ones left who think an elected government should still represent the wishes of the people, rather than their own wishes?
I guess we'll never know at the very least we're the last ones who ENFORCE it... on a european level at least.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
and I don't "heart" government. but I don't see how 80+ million people can live without one...but let's not get off topic...you seem fairly angry to me anyway...but that's just me...
m.
did you just pluck that figure out of the air? i dont see how 1 government can govrn 60 milliion. what has my emotional state got to do with anything? you seem like an ass kissing geek anyway...but thats just me
Comments
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
for europe as a whole the treaty strengthens (representative) democracy as it gives more power to the european parliament which, comparable to national parliaments, consists of elected representatives from each EU country that are voted for by every eu citizen. formerly the european commision and council, which are not democratically elected (in their function for europe) had the major say in european policy which in great parts happened outside the public eye.
i don't see how this is the evil monstrum that people try to evoke here.
smaller countries are given more votes than they would have relative to their population. there need to be a certain number of countries for vetos. this is the only way to ensure that one or two single countries can't bring the decision making process to a complete stop out of self interest. yet there is a sufficient possibility for countries to oppose to policies in a coalition (democracy at its best)
if, in consequence of the irish rejection of the document, the decision is made
to start afresh with a smaller number of countries that are willing to engange in a more advanced integration. both groups of countries are perfectly respected.
the eu never a tool to make farming or getting to PJ concerts easier as people have pointed out elsewhere. it started as an economic cooperation mainly between france and germany that now has expanded to incluce countries in the (former) european periphery like portigal, greece, ireland, poland, or estonia for MUTUAL benefit. that those countries (some more than others) after centuries of warfare and economic battles try to get closer also in social and legislative matters is a step i most warmly welcome.
I am not an economist and neither am working for a big company but people need to stop blaming economic interests for all the wrongs in the world. sheer economic cooperation can be and often is the starting points also for a closer social interaction. there always has to be something in it for people to get in contact.
m.
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
where are you getting that idea from? Nobody suggested that... although Lisbon left the POSSIBILITY of that happening. Like a lot of the scaremongering stuff on the no side... it's highly doubtful it will happen but who knows what state the world will be in in 20 years time and who's in charge.
Yes I know how it works... but I think we're seeing a HUGE lack of respect for democracy in play right now.
Hmm... forget about opposing and vetos... it also makes it easier for a few of the bigger countries to just get a couple of little countries onside and run away with the whole thing themselves. See there are too many gaps... too many problems with this treaty!
So we split europe? Simply cos the people didn't like the 'advancements' they were putting forth? That's ridiculous.
See that's where we split. The economic cooperation and trading bloc and the reasons the EU was set up really was a great idea... and it still is. But they're asking us to vote for a completely different Europe here. Even the States of America get to choose their own taxes! We'd be handing way too much power over to politicians.... and I simply do not believe there is any need for it.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
yes, but some countries want to go beyond that...why would you stop them if others WANT to join them. the irish aren't forced to do it.
m.
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
and if the smaller countries get together they can impose stuff on bigger countries. that's the way it works. right now nothing works, because if one country says it doesn't want to go along, nothing happens.
and the treaty even allows countries not to implement rulings they reject. there is still room for countries to make individual policies. maybe less than before, but that's not necessarily bad as long as I can still influence it with my vote.
that's just what I'm talking about. if not every one wants to work together more closely some will and some won't.
europe has always been split. Norway, Switzerland, Serbia, Croatia, Ukraine...all not in the EU, yet european countries...and you said elsewhere that you didn't understand why those eastern countries had to join, so what kind of split is the right one for you....west and east, rich and poor??
I rather go with working together and not working together...
m.
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
what do you mean nothing happens? Things stay the same... but the EU has plenty of power as it is. Sure they're always giving us slaps on the wrist over this and over that... there's plenty they can do and are doing.
Yes, but as I've said before... look at the bullying that goes on. The Irish government are not as strong minded as the collective Irish people... if France were to make threats over our tax breaks and suggest punishing us in some other way, there's NO doubt in my mind that our government would give in.
What? where did I say that? I've NO problem with enlargement... I never said that anywhere... we voted for that in Nice... which I voted YES to by the way. I understand completely why they'd want to join and why we should let them. That's never been an issue for me anyway... and we did already vote on that so I doubt it was an issue for anyone else either.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
I keep hearing this assumption from pro-euros, that the other countries WANT it.
If by referendum every country had said yes there would be no real issue to argue.
Had the Irish not had their referendum guaranteed in their constitution, their parties made it clear they would have been forced to.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
you were forced to have a referendum
So nope, I wasn't. Me personally, I was not forced into either decision... unlike at LEAST some of the governments of the 26 other countries.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
two little ironies that I heard on the news just now:
a)without the treaty in the next phase of legislature one country of the 27 cannot be in the european council.
who decides which one?
is that democratic?
b) without the treaty next year after the eu parliament election germany will have more representatives than were planned under the treaty
besides: I don't think referendums are the answer here. people elected their parliaments. there are parties in every country that are contra-eu or contra-a-closer-eu. they can be voted for in secret and democratic elections.
in poland for example they were in power for a while.
again: with referendums neither germany nor france would have a commen currency, the eastern countries wouldn't be in the eu, and there sure as well wouldn't be open borders...
m.
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
And I keep telling you, referendums have to be the answer in Ireland. It's in our Constitution - without a referendum, the Treaty would be illegal.
the UK elected a party who had as a major part of their manifesto the promise of a referendum. Ye ye treaty constitution, untrustworthy backdoor crap.
i know best presumption that makes people distrust government and those that love them.
and I keep repeating that I know that. but people here continue refering to it as undemocratic if OTHER countries don't have referendums. a ratification by an elected parliament can be and is just as democratic as a referendum. the latter doesn't have 80units of democracy and the other only 65units of democracy...
m.
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
well, that's representative democracy...you are free to reject it, not go to vote, and organise referendums for every matter that you are interested in.
and I don't understand what you mean by your last statement, sorry.
m.
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Well, France and Holland rejected the EU Constitution a few years back. This time, they reworded it so that the government could decide for them - Sarkozy even admitted that it would have been rejected again if it had gone to the people. Doesn't exactly scream democracy, does it?
Sarkozy was elected by the majority of French people, wasn't he?
They could have gone with Le Pen if they wanted a different(=no) eu.
The French are to blame, just as the americans are to blame for electing Bush (the second time at least;)).
m.
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
but the again, the sovereign French people elected by majority Nicholas Sarkozy as their president knowing full well about his position re: Lisbon Treaty.
Edit: just saw Nobody's post.
first one!
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Agreed.
You obviously didnt understand the first statement either, but i cant be arsed with any of it to be honest. You heart government, for your own reasons. i don't trust them because their actions are untrustworthy to me. thats about as far as we're going to get.
Free to reject it! good one.
i understood very well (your first statement). and my answer is. get active and organize referendums about issues you are interested in. it's possible, at least on a local level...
m.
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
election manifesto.
m.
"As an internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
And are the Irish the last ones left who think an elected government should still represent the wishes of the people, rather than their own wishes?
See... I think we've seen enough examples of dictatorships throughout the world to prove that we cannot put the power solely in the hands of governments. Do we not learn anything?
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
why on earth would that be undemocratic??!!?!
indeed, they took on board what the people said with their NO vote and reworked the treaty taking into account all the member states concerns, via the EU parliament, lobby groups [including citizens], the Council, the EU Commision.
BTW, any government is made up of people, i.e. representives, that the majority of voters have chosen.
There isn't just direct democracy [like you had in Ancient Greece] but there's also the concept of parliamentary representative democracy.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
did you just pluck that figure out of the air? i dont see how 1 government can govrn 60 milliion. what has my emotional state got to do with anything? you seem like an ass kissing geek anyway...but thats just me