The Sponsors and Advertising Discussion Thread

[the-goon]

First topic message reminder :

There will always be good reason to discuss the influence and the effects of corporate money input sport.

[Collapse2005]

I thought younger people were partying less. That's how it seems to be going in Ireland. There seem to be less night clubs and younger people seem to be drinking less in general and more interested in their health.

In fairness we were pretty excessive in the 90s when I grew up.

[clivemcl]

Sin, just cut to the chase.

You'd be hapy to see a small percentage of inncent people in jail as a small sacrifice for most guilty people getting punished.

You'd like to see people goingt o jail without being 100% sure of their guilt.

Either just admit this or quit arguing.

I don't believe that and A) no way have I ever said that it is worth sacrificing innocent people. My point is that the victims should be taken care of as well. There is very little evidence of false reporting (and if they are they are usually either withdrawn by the alleged victim or the police won't prosecute because of lack of evidence).  Barristers can do or say anything to introduce a doubt into the minds of a jurist (such as producing underwear that is deemed sexy - inferring that they must have been asking for it) and that is all they have to do to get off.

Its a really difficult situation and by putting your heads in the sand and making a joke about signing consent forms etc., B)how about educating people about consent?

Your passion for this problem is admirable Sin, but you are JUST saying words now. Let's get to the nitty gritty.

A) You don't want to sacrifice innocent people, and yet you won't accept that there was insufficient evidence of Jackson's guilt. The conclusion of what you've said, highlighted, that you are in favour of people being punished if we can prove it. There was no proof in Jackson's case, so please stop claiming that he is guilty, or that the eye witness is untrustworthy.

B) Educating people about consent? I assume you mean, educating people to stop when told to stop, and educating people to not force activity. If you want to call that consent, then fine, but I think 95% of the country just call that being a respectable human being.
If on the other hand, you are saying verbal consent, then I have to ask what world you live in? Bare in mind that even kissing can be deemed abuse and forced. Or physical touch of any kind. What you are asking for is a return to Victorian courting or something. Are young men to ask 'Would it be ok with you if I kissed you?' and a similar further request for every subsequent step in the activity that may follow?

Come on, I know that sometimes women are afraid and 'freeze', or silently 'give in'. But are you really asking for courtship and encounters to be verbally agreed? What about half way through? Is it expected that the couple say to each other 'If at any point you feel uncomfortable with what we are doing, please just let me know?'

Is this the practice you propose we educate people on?

[No 7&1/2]

To answer those questions fly. Yes companies can sponsor who they like. Possibly Diageo have based it on how they look I touched upon some of the things they've have bound to have discussed earlier.
Yea people could pull out from sponsoring a club who picked Folou because as I said earlier most add clauses for breaking contracts. In terms of come back it depends on how that contract is written. Same for your Muslim example which is the same example but guess you feel that muslims are special? No for homosexuality race etc as it would be breaking the law though they could not sponsor someone and just keep quiet as a few racists in our societies do.

[Sin é]

I just don't think that unconditionally believing one gender over the other is the answer given that dishonesty isn't a uniquely male characteristic and real equality commands equal treatment and/or compromise.

I agree.

Though educating boys and girls that going out having fun is all part of being young but both boys and girls can unwittingly put themselves in a comprised situation where they will face regret for the rest of their lives.

It’s funny how the public opinion is to educate young people to avoid dangerous situations and yet it would be seen as unpopular and ridiculous to educate young people in just not getting drunk or being in the company of those who are drunk at a private party.

Classic modern society where being blocked is a valid excuse for minor misdemeanours including punch ups and being rude, but when it comes to more serious crime apparently we happily ignore the social norm of over indulging with alcohol and instead judge people as evil or immoral etc.

Being drunk is either perfectly understandable or very not wise. Come on 2019 society. Make your mind up.

There are plenty of alcohol awareness programmes being funded by Government and the drinks companies. The reason the drinks companies sponsor them is that they know they will be banned from promoting their products if they don't. The IRFU and sporting organisations need their sponsorship. By the way, the GAA will not accept alcohol sponsorship (and Guinness used to do a lot with them) and in France, there are very tight controls on alcohol company marketing.

Companies like Diageo are only delighted to head up awareness campaigns as they retain control of the message being imparted. Its a complete conflict of interest which prevents such industries dying a natural death.

They don't head up awareness campaigns. They contribute funding to them. The responsible body is an independent charity in Ireland called Drink Aware. There website is here https://www.drinkaware.ie/ Under funding, you will see their sponsors which include Daegeo.

[No 7&1/2]

The education on consent is a great thing. You are allowed to reflect on this past the school years as well just so people are aware. Teach your kids.

[SecretFly]

Believe it or not Fly, The School of Science in UCD are attempting to develop such an App. which is a non-runner for all such of reasons.

All the colleges (student Unions) are running mandatory course now on sexual health/behavour/consent. Hopefully it will reduce the incidences of accidental r*** (where someone thought someone was up for it)!. The Dept. of Justice are running an ad campaign at the moment on sexual harassment/violence.

Now, if someone rapes someone, they should be charged and found guilty and not get off on suggestions of consent by someone because they are wearing sexy underwear.

Delighted to see you think the App is a non-runner.  There's hope for humanity still - slightly.

On the other stuff.  Not my version of an ideal society.  Students who fail to show for the mandatory sex lessons/behaviour are kicked out of college?  Sex health/behaviour/consent professionals giving themselves paid employment through coercion?  
I wouldn't have attended in my time. I'd have been kicked?  
No conformity to sex 'education' = no degree or professional qualification?
State/secular organisations secreting themselves into the private sexual habits, urges, desires and morals of a maturing populace whilst those same forces ridiculed the Catholic Church for the same oppressive interference in the personal sexual identity of its followers?  Just because it's secular doesn't mean it hasn't a dogmatic agenda.  For example, students told/educated to conform to notions of more than two genders to respect socio political 'norms'?

Sorry, but it sounds too much like China's 're-education' programs for political dissidents.  Indeed, maybe it's the very ruse to test out such programmes.  "You are politically irregular.  You are disturbing the political norms and upsetting your fellow citizens.  Holding the views you do threatens the fabric of society.  You risk thinking Hate Thoughts.  You will have to partake in mandatory re-education to free your mind from divisive political philosophies and your thoughts must not be allowed infect the collective."

Would you come to my defence if such an age befell us, Sin?  I'd be counting on you to turn up with your Rambo ammo belts and your Croc Dundee knife!!!! We gotta look out for each other!

[SecretFly]

To answer those questions fly. Yes companies can sponsor who they like. Possibly Diageo have based it on how they look I touched upon some of the things they've have bound to have discussed earlier.
Yea people could pull out from sponsoring a club who picked Folou because as I said earlier most add clauses for breaking contracts. In terms of come back it depends on how that contract is written. Same for your Muslim example which is the same example but guess you feel that muslims are special? No for homosexuality race etc as it would be breaking the law though they could not sponsor someone and just keep quiet as a few racists in our societies do.

I don't think Mulims are special. What made you think that? Because I did a compare and contrast on how relatively safe it is to criticise/comically ridicule Christianity (it's belief systems) but it's markedly less safe to do so in the context of the Muslim faith? No spin just fact.
Therefore it is always easier to shine the light on Christians intolerance than to do the same for Muslims. Therefore such knowledge would inform a company's sponsorship ideals. Just logic, 7. Just logic.

[No 7&1/2]

Comparing a Muslim saying what Folau did is the exact same thing. You say they're not special but then go onto to say they are.so no homophobia from a Muslim is going to get the same response from me.

[Sin é]

Believe it or not Fly, The School of Science in UCD are attempting to develop such an App. which is a non-runner for all such of reasons.

All the colleges (student Unions) are running mandatory course now on sexual health/behavour/consent. Hopefully it will reduce the incidences of accidental r*** (where someone thought someone was up for it)!. The Dept. of Justice are running an ad campaign at the moment on sexual harassment/violence.

Now, if someone rapes someone, they should be charged and found guilty and not get off on suggestions of consent by someone because they are wearing sexy underwear.

Delighted to see you think the App is a non-runner.  There's hope for humanity still - slightly.

On the other stuff.  Not my version of an ideal society.  Students who fail to show for the mandatory sex lessons/behaviour are kicked out of college?  Sex health/behaviour/consent professionals giving themselves paid employment through coercion?  
I wouldn't have attended in my time. I'd have been kicked?  
No conformity to sex 'education' = no degree or professional qualification?
State/secular organisations secreting themselves into the private sexual habits, urges, desires and morals of a maturing populace whilst those same forces ridiculed the Catholic Church for the same oppressive interference in the personal sexual identity of its followers?  Just because it's secular doesn't mean it hasn't a dogmatic agenda.  For example, students told/educated to conform to notions of more than two genders to respect socio political 'norms'?

Sorry, but it sounds too much like China's 're-education' programs for political dissidents.  Indeed, maybe it's the very ruse to test out such programmes.  "You are politically irregular.  You are disturbing the political norms and upsetting your fellow citizens.  Holding the views you do threatens the fabric of society.  You risk thinking Hate Thoughts.  You will have to partake in mandatory re-education to free your mind from divisive political philosophies and your thoughts must not be allowed infect the collective."

Would you come to my defence if such an age befell us, Sin?  I'd be counting on you to turn up with your Rambo ammo belts and your Croc Dundee knife!!!!  We gotta look out for each other!

Mandatory by the Students Union Fly, who run the courses, not the colleges. In your day, you would have missed out on Student discounts and there is no way you would have been able to get a J1 !

[SecretFly]

Comparing a Muslim saying what Folau did is the exact same thing. You say they're not special but then go onto to say they are.so no homophobia from a Muslim is going to get the same response from me.

I'm saying a special place has been made in our society (of which these companies are a big part) for Muslim beliefs i.e., you don't mention them, don't talk about them, certainly don't ridicule them, don't criticise them...the belief systems in their Religion.  You don't do so because why?   Accusations of Hate Crime or actual crime perpetrated: Je suis Charlie?  
I'd prefer NOT to have the special treatment, and for them to be treated in the same way that Christianity is treated. Would you?
I'm saying it was easy to attack Folau. Example: quite a lot of Saudi investment in the UK?  In Saudi Arabia you don't go to hell for being homosexual when you die, you just die.  Actually, I've just seen an article in the Guardian that states both the Independent and Standard news publications are begging the state not to investigate their Saudi investment offshore links, claiming the UK media industry would be threatened if offshore backers were probed.  Hmmm, wonder what the sports pages of those publications was saying when Folau was in the news.

I'm just claiming good old fashioned selective hypocrisy, 7.  Virtue signaling companies funded/invested in by reprehensible regimes across the world, it all kept below the covers so as not to upset the righteous masses.....

[SecretFly]

Mandatory by the Students Union Fly, who run the courses, not the colleges. In your day, you would have missed out on Student discounts and there is no way you would have been able to get a J1 !

Even bloody worse! A politicised Socialist Union (they all are) run the mandatory 'behavior' stuff?

Christ, how many of you have actually genuinely read 1984? All this stuff without blinking as I keep saying. Mandatory Behavior classes, branding rapists on the cheek, believing the woman.....

I wonder is 1984 on school reading lists now that I think of it. Or has it been banned? Anybody know? We certainly know that they are trying to ban History from the cirriculum.

[No 7&1/2]

They are treated the same way on the majority of cases fly. There are still Islamophobia like Katie Hopkins around of course.
It is easy to attack a homophobia like Foloa you're quite right. And yes homiphobes in christianity and Islam have a lot in common. As I said earlier the whole range of reasons including pr would have been discussed around Irish s decision to pick up Jackson.

[SecretFly]

They are treated the same way on the majority of cases fly. There are still Islamophobia like Katie Hopkins around of course.
It is easy to attack a homophobia like Foloa you're quite right. And yes homiphobes in christianity and Islam have a lot in common. As I said earlier the whole range of reasons including pr would have been discussed around Irish s decision to pick up Jackson.

PR is the hypocrisy bit though, isn't it.  That's the hypocrisy bit.  But the dangerous thing is that it's projected as being protective, caring and nurturing of common values.  
Like I hinted at, maybe things are beginning to get uncomfortable now as companies are exposed for the company they keep behind the 'firewalls'.  People will be able to decide for themselves why one sector of society is rebuked and the other gets 'silence' and protected behind socially 'responsible' censorship.

Yep, good news story this morning actually.  And I wouldn't have even seen it had I not been talking about Folau.

[maestegmafia]

Whilst to the larger degree this has been an interesting debate circumventing many of the issues at hand here, I think it is safe to say that we all have common interests that reflect both our abhorrence to Sexual and physical attack and likewise the objectives of someone falsely accusing another.

The modern world is ever changing and the influence of corporations on marketing, influencing culture and also their reaction to news stories whether good or bad can also effect our lives.

But I can not see why any of us on here need to try and personally interrogate another.

I have deleted a few posts above because the members constructed posts that I believe alienated another member unfairly.

I don’t want to lock down this thread. There is always much to discuss on sports advertising, but all moderators have a zero tolerance for bullying, alienation or defamation. This can not continue.

I’ll change the topic headline above to a non club specific title. May this thread continue to inspire interesting and exciting debate on advertising, sponsorship and so forth related to rugby clubs and players

[Sin é]

Mandatory by the Students Union Fly, who run the courses, not the colleges. In your day, you would have missed out on Student discounts and there is no way you would have been able to get a J1 !

Even bloody worse!  A politicised Socialist Union (they all are) run the mandatory 'behavior' stuff?

Christ, how many of you have actually genuinely read 1984?  All this stuff without blinking as I keep saying.  Mandatory Behavior classes, branding rapists on the cheek, believing the woman.....

I wonder is 1984 on school reading lists now that I think of it.  Or has it been banned?  Anybody know?  We certainly know that they are trying to ban History from the cirriculum.

So what would be your solution to this issue Fly?

A recent Union of Students in Ireland report, based on a survey of more than 2,700 students, found 16 per cent of respondents had experienced “unwanted sexual contact”. Some 5 per cent of women said they had been raped, and a further 3 per cent that they had been the victims of attempted r***.

There are 10 reports of sexual assault per day in Ireland to the Gardai. Obviously most will not reports them. Seemingly its pretty bad in the homosexual scene.

[Sin é]

Your passion for this problem is admirable Sin, but you are JUST saying words now. Let's get to the nitty gritty.

A) You don't want to sacrifice innocent people, and yet you won't accept that there was insufficient evidence of Jackson's guilt. The conclusion of what you've said, highlighted, that you are in favour of people being punished if we can prove it. There was no proof in Jackson's case, so please stop claiming that he is guilty, or that the eye witness is untrustworthy.

The problem is there is not always proof - its a 'he says, she says' situation. From what I can see in that situation, the present 'without reasonable doubt' isn't working when you don't have a smoking gun, or a bruised body.

B) Educating people about consent? I assume you mean, educating people to stop when told to stop, and educating people to not force activity. If you want to call that consent, then fine, but I think 95% of the country just call that being a respectable human being.
If on the other hand, you are saying verbal consent, then I have to ask what world you live in? Bare in mind that even kissing can be deemed abuse and forced. Or physical touch of any kind. What you are asking for is a return to Victorian courting or something. Are young men to ask 'Would it be ok with you if I kissed you?' and a similar further request for every subsequent step in the activity that may follow?

I haven't been on one of these courses, but I presume it is ways of improving communications and learning to read situations better. The problem is the porn industry has objectified the whole sexual thing and this is where young men/women are getting their sex education from.

Here are the ads being run in the republic about sexual harrasment.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/ireland-suffers-from-disturbingly-high-levels-of-sexual-harassment-says-flanagan-1.3886408

Come on, I know that sometimes women are afraid and 'freeze', or silently 'give in'. But are you really asking for courtship and encounters to be verbally agreed? What about half way through? Is it expected that the couple say to each other 'If at any point you feel uncomfortable with what we are doing, please just let me know?'

Is this the practice you propose we educate people on?

I don't think you would necessarily have to say anything, just be aware of someone's body language. Those ads are very realistic.

[LondonTiger]

There are 10 reports of sexual assault per day in Ireland to the Gardai. Obviously most will not reports them. Seemingly its pretty bad in the homosexual scene.

At the very low end of the scale but:

1) A couple of months ago while travelling up a long escalator at a Londond Underground Station I felt pressure on my back and buttocks. Nothing untoward I thought, the space is small, lots of people and I am a large lad. Then the pressure moved, I looked round and a youngish man was squeezed up to me with his hand between us and rubbing. Shocked and with my daughters in front of me I froze, we got to the top and I followed my daughters left while the man turned right.


2) A month ago, travelling on the Central Line back to her mum's house, my 17yo daughter was standing when a man got very close and almost started grinding. There was plenty of standing space so she moved. He moved behind her again and repeated his actions. She moved again, the previous interaction repeated itself so she told him to stop and moved to the end of the carriage. The interaction repeated itself and she told him to move away and stop touching her. He grinned and did not move....but then a vey tall physical women stood up and told him to move away "or else". He left at the next station.


Officially this would be both of us failing to report sexual abuse. I froze, my daughter was in a hurry and was relieved that at least someone had chosen to help her - yet we both feel we have let others down by not reporting matters.

[No 7&1/2]

Its something like that LT where it's all too easy for us to think we'd know definitely what we'd do. Rubbish though ain't it as theres countless times we end up frozen and think what if. Thre is a culture of blaming yourself to a lesser ot greater extent of we should have said something or what did we do to cause that situation. That's why I like the culture we're getting now. The little things you can do when you see situations where social queues are missed or ignored by people.
Well done to the woman standing up for your daughter but it is easy to find even the bravest of us looking down at the ground or suddenly finding ourselves really interested in reading 606v2.

[Sin é]

The world has gone mad. Did Westminister ever pass that law about up-skirting?

Just hearing now that two boys aged 14 were found guilty of the r*** and murder of a  14 year old girl. One of the boys sounds absolutely evil. He had 14,000 pornographic images (all sorts) on his phone (this evidence was inadmissable) and was into also sorts of dark web stuff.

By the way, both had pleaded 'not guilty'.

[maestegmafia]

The world has gone mad. Did Westminister ever pass that law about up-skirting?

As you may have noticed from the news in general we have a government of absolute lunatics, mostly extremists and many without a single ounce of empathy for the country they are creating, no different to the last time they had a go in the 80s and 90s.

Sport is one of the few things still almost positive in our ever shrinking world

[Sin é]

The world has gone mad. Did Westminister ever pass that law about up-skirting?

As you may have noticed from the news in general we have a government of absolute lunatics, mostly extremists and many without a single ounce of empathy for the country they are creating, no different to the last time they had a go in the 80s and 90s.

Sport is one of the few things still almost positive in our ever shrinking world

Yes. I had noticed. Just watching the Tory Leadership vote at the moment. Its great entertainment if only it was make believe.

Just an aside about the repercussions on the Leinster-Ulster semi if the UK crashed out of the EU last March.

When the original exit date of 29 March approached, officials fretted that the Leinster V Ulster rugby match the next day might be hit if Britain crashed out without a deal. Contingency plans were worked up that envisaged southern-registered buses and drivers having to drive north to collect Ulster rugby supporters.

In the event, Dublin was able to deploy its No Deal legislation as well as the EU’s own emergency exemptions to ensure Northern buses and drivers were operable (eventually the UK sought an extension so these exemptions were not invoked).

https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2019/0614/1055418-double-whammy-a-no-deal-brexit-and-northern-ireland/

[SecretFly]

Utter orchestrated panic generation by well known State propaganda arm, RTÉ in unison with State officials.

The match would have taken place...and planes would have flown.  Doomsday scenarios about Brexit will continue to be pushed right up until and even after it happens - IF it happens.

It's natural and it's obvious.  There are forces, and companies, and journalists, and editors, and politicians and voters that don't want it to happen.  Of course they'll generate as much negativity around the process as possible.  That's politics.

[Collapse2005]

On a separate note the details of the Ana Kriegel trial are absolutely shocking. Poor girl and feel sorry for her parents too. What a pointless waste of life.

The Irish Times have done a good job of summarising all details (possibly subscriber only)

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/ana-kriegel-murder-trial-the-complete-story-1.3929570

The details of the trial are quite interesting in particular how the jury arrived at a guilty verdict on boy B where there was a real lack of any physical evidence. It looks like the Gardai and DPP played a blinder in this trial.

[formerly known as Sam]

Utter orchestrated panic generation by well known State propaganda arm, RTÉ in unison with State officials.

The match would have taken place...and planes would have flown.  Doomsday scenarios about Brexit will continue to be pushed right up until and even after it happens - IF it happens.

It's natural and it's obvious.  There are forces, and companies, and journalists, and editors, and politicians and voters that don't want it to happen.  Of course they'll generate as much negativity around the process as possible.  That's politics.

Mainly the journalists or at least those that own the newspapers are very keen to see Brexit come in. The harder the Brexit the better. Well at least this side of the sea. A number of them are non-dom, wealth hidden in tax haven trust tax dodgers who are significantly worried by the new EU regulations on tax. It's why all the hard line Tories who are desperate to leave with no deal all have very posh accents.

[SecretFly]

Utter orchestrated panic generation by well known State propaganda arm, RTÉ in unison with State officials.

The match would have taken place...and planes would have flown.  Doomsday scenarios about Brexit will continue to be pushed right up until and even after it happens - IF it happens.

It's natural and it's obvious.  There are forces, and companies, and journalists, and editors, and politicians and voters that don't want it to happen.  Of course they'll generate as much negativity around the process as possible.  That's politics.

Mainly the journalists or at least those that own the newspapers are very keen to see Brexit come in. The harder the Brexit the better. Well at least this side of the sea. A number of them are non-dom, wealth hidden in tax haven trust tax dodgers who are significantly worried by the new EU regulations on tax. It's why all the hard line Tories who are desperate to leave with no deal all have very posh accents.

They're not the ones who bulked up the Brexit vote to the level that it carried though, are they?  It was a different class of people entirely who saw the Brexit vote through - the rustic, aging, working class little-Englanders, as we were directed to represent them.
Plus, we all know that ultra rich, ultra connected sorts will always find ways to generate new avenues to withhold wealth and the EU never did and never will threaten them - the EU is run by the very same people - wealthy, connected, lobbyist stroking and know all the tricks of sounding like they are going to make themselves poorer for the good of society.  Nope, they're going to make you poorer for the good of society - as always.

Anyway, this is all probably for the Brexit thread below.  I simply think that if Tory toffs are genuinely for Leaving (and I'm not remotely convinced of their honesty on that score yet) they want out because they see a more lucrative future in a less controlled global marketplace.  So yes, they see money, (we all want some) but only in championing a different version of global trading that might bring it about.

[formerly known as Sam]

Utter orchestrated panic generation by well known State propaganda arm, RTÉ in unison with State officials.

The match would have taken place...and planes would have flown.  Doomsday scenarios about Brexit will continue to be pushed right up until and even after it happens - IF it happens.

It's natural and it's obvious.  There are forces, and companies, and journalists, and editors, and politicians and voters that don't want it to happen.  Of course they'll generate as much negativity around the process as possible.  That's politics.

Mainly the journalists or at least those that own the newspapers are very keen to see Brexit come in. The harder the Brexit the better. Well at least this side of the sea. A number of them are non-dom, wealth hidden in tax haven trust tax dodgers who are significantly worried by the new EU regulations on tax. It's why all the hard line Tories who are desperate to leave with no deal all have very posh accents.

They're not the ones who bulked up the Brexit vote to the level that it carried though, are they?  It was a different class of people entirely who saw the Brexit vote through - the rustic, aging, working class little-Englanders, as we were directed to represent them.
Plus, we all know that ultra rich, ultra connected sorts will always find ways to generate new avenues to withhold wealth and the EU never did and never will threaten them - the EU is run by the very same people - wealthy, connected, lobbyist stroking and know all the tricks of sounding like they are going to make themselves poorer for the good of society.  Nope, they're going to make you poorer for the good of society - as always.

Anyway, this is all probably for the Brexit thread below.  I simply think that if Tory toffs are genuinely for Leaving (and I'm not remotely convinced of their honesty on that score yet) they want out because they see a more lucrative future in a less controlled global marketplace.  So yes, they see money, (we all want some) but only in championing a different version of global trading that might bring it about.

They have brought in new laws from January see;

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/company-tax/anti-tax-avoidance-package/anti-tax-avoidance-directive_en

It was also easy for the right wing media and the Brexit lobbying group to put about large amounts of misinformation targeting people who were fed up with the status quo. Much like Adolf gave Germany an enemy during the post WWI depression years the likes of The Sun and The Daily Mail happily pinpointed foreigners and the EU as the reason working class areas were suffering, who needs facts when you don't bother to publish the rebutle that shows your headline from the previous day I'd absolute rubbish. It successfully generated a ground swell of support from people that traditionally didn't vote.

[SecretFly]

?

Sorry, but you lose me on that.  If you cared to read published quotes from people like Junker.  If you listened to some of the rabid speeches by EU poster boy Verhofstad, then I think the reference to Hitler and Germany might be very pertinent.  Verhofstad is on record as wanting his EU army and his EU empire.  Isn't that what Napoleon wanted and isn't that what Hitler wanted?  An Empire created from the ashes of European's Nation states?  That's the goal of the EU, to assume control and end the concept of the Nation State on the continent of Europe.  And they slap all that in cozy united-people's-speak.

Sam, you can believe in the benificence of the EU project.  I don't.  And I'm not super rich, I have no offshore tax havens protecting my ill gotten gains.  The reason the non voters voted was perhaps they were finally asked the right question.

[Sin é]

?

Sorry, but you lose me on that.  If you cared to read published quotes from people like Junker.  If you listened to some of the rabid speeches by EU poster boy Verhofstad, then I think the reference to Hitler and Germany might be very pertinent.  Verhofstad is on record as wanting his EU army and his EU empire.  Isn't that what Napoleon wanted and isn't that what Hitler wanted?  An Empire created from the ashes of European's Nation states?  That's the goal of the EU, to assume control and end the concept of the Nation State on the continent of Europe.  And they slap all that in cozy united-people's-speak.

Sam, you can believe in the benificence of the EU project.  I don't.  And I'm not super rich, I have no offshore tax havens protecting my ill gotten gains.  The reason the non voters voted was perhaps they were finally asked the right question.

Fly, thats sounds like something Farage would come out with. Verhofstad is an elected MEP who is the European Parliament's Brexit's spokesperson. Juncker is the retiring President of the European Commission (having served 4 years as its President). All you have heard is their opinion which they are entitled to have and express. They have no power to create anything you have suggested and not even closely related a dictatorship.

[Tramptastic]

When it comes to Europe it should be noted that all laws produced by the EU are voted on by MEPs

If you don't like the laws being produced you can change your vote - simples

So by that logic if there's a suggestion of a european army or the nations being brought closer together than these subsequent suggestions, proposed as law would have to be voted on by the MEPs - again people you should vote for.

For some reason everyone thinks the EU is undemocratic because they use unelected officials in the European commission. In reality these officials are civil servants and any laws that they propose HAVE to be approved/voted on by MEPs.

Don't like the laws being proposed then vote for different MEPs. Personally i take issue with the treatment of scottish fisherman BUT i approve of the progressive environmental & social justice laws passed by the democratically elected EU. I would much sooner be a part of the EU than leave the tories to dictate social and environmental policy to the UK

[SecretFly]

Thanks for synopsising the Political record of both men.  This gives them integrity and gravitas in your eyes when telling me what they are and have been?
So is Farage... an elected MEP.  You have much respect for him?   No.  Thought not.

The EU is by design and by Treaty a project to dilute Nation States and assume Federal control.  That's why unruly 'Nationalists' are so vilified and so feared.  The EU wants more power not less power and Brexit plus Nationalists across Europe have put holes in the ship of that ambition.  It's taking on water and is trying to make running repairs.  

ANYWAY, Sin, if we get into this we'll be hijacking another thread by once again going well away from Thread's title.

In brief, you're allowed like the EU for your reasons, I'm allowed (I think... though censorship of Eurosceptic voices in Ireland suggests otherwise) dislike the EU for my reasons.

I think we better respect the thread title.  I'll try to....  

[Sin é]

Farage is an eurosceptic MEP who (along with a few others) seem to get an awful lot of airtime in the Irish media. I know it will surprise you, but I'm allowed to think whatever I like of Farage, just as you are. No one is forcing either of us to have that opinion.

The plot to dilute Nation States is going to fail, because none of those in charge will be there long enough to execute the project. If for instance Juncker was running for President of the Commission, Farage / anyone could block his appointment if he / they could get enough people to vote against him/support someone else.

Thats how democracy works.

As for the silencing of Eurosceptic voices - Farage & Co. are never off the airwaves here. That ex-diplomat (can't remember his name now), is usually pulled in, as was Herman Kelly. Gemma O'Doherty is another one who is all over the place. Kelly's Freedom Party is going nowhere (despite the support of the likes of the anti-8th Amendment crowd, Declan Ganley and Co. People just see through them.

[SecretFly]

Of course you're allowed think of Farage what you will.  I already said so, don't make it sound different.

As regards the EU failing in its agenda.  Well maybe it will, after all more 'Farages' have entered the Parliament - finally.  As you say, that's how democracy works.  But first we have to get proof that all the declared Eurosceptics going to Parliament there are being honest.  Nothing like riding a wave of popularity/populism and then stalling the Eurosceptic train when you get in there.  Double agent stuff.  Remember Douglas Carswell?

And no I don't see all the Irish Eurosceptic people you mentioned all over the Irish printed and TV media... RTE, Newstalk, Irish Independent - Europhile Central.
Anyway.... there is a thread down there on Brexit in the main rugby area there.  Say what you want there, Sin, please.  I know we'll bore the bejaysus out of other people.

[formerly known as Sam]

?

Sorry, but you lose me on that.  If you cared to read published quotes from people like Junker.  If you listened to some of the rabid speeches by EU poster boy Verhofstad, then I think the reference to Hitler and Germany might be very pertinent.  Verhofstad is on record as wanting his EU army and his EU empire.  Isn't that what Napoleon wanted and isn't that what Hitler wanted?  An Empire created from the ashes of European's Nation states?  That's the goal of the EU, to assume control and end the concept of the Nation State on the continent of Europe.  And they slap all that in cozy united-people's-speak.

Sam, you can believe in the benificence of the EU project.  I don't.  And I'm not super rich, I have no offshore tax havens protecting my ill gotten gains.  The reason the non voters voted was perhaps they were finally asked the right question.

Oh I don't like the EU. I just don't see any point in leaving now after several decades of integration. It'll cost billions at a time when the money needs to be spent elsewhere. Also the EU army stuff is crap, it'll never come to pass and if they try we have a veto (or do currently). If our government weren't so incompetent they could be an active part of setting the agenda as opposed to being seen as the problem child.

The UK is the worst nation in the world for aiding anti avoidance and this particular EU directive will help limit some of that stupidity (not all of it as various protectorates etc will still be doing their thing).

[No 7&1/2]

Gotta love Drew Mitchell.

[BamBam]

That is a great response by him

[Collapse2005]

Gotta love Drew Mitchell.

What did he say?

[No 7&1/2]

It's about the aussie guy recently in the news who we're not allowed to talk about collapse!

[Collapse2005]

Rolf Harris?

[maestegmafia]

Surprised to see that Folau has raised 10% of his fund me total already....!

[Collapse2005]

Im not really surprised. A lot of people from his background are quite religious.

In Tonga religion and rugby have always gone hand and hand and you can blame the Irish for that because Irish missionaries brought Christianity and rugby to Tonga.

[No 7&1/2]

People will give money a wide variety of people. I can't help but feel Mitchell is right to suggest that Folau could be asking for people to donate to a better place and indeed people could be supporting better people but hey ho.

[Sponsored content]