Anger over Sinn Féin mayor's 'glorification' of IRA members [Northern Ireland]

Belfast Telegraph ^ | May 20 2019 | Staff Reporter

[Olog-hai]

The newly-elected mayor of Causeway Coast and Glens Council has come under attack over his attendance at IRA commemorations.

Sean Bateson (26), who topped the poll for Sinn Féin in the Bann electoral area, was appointed mayor of the borough just days after being elected for his first term.

Over the weekend, social media posts emerged which showed Mr. Bateson — who is a supply teacher at Sperrin Integrated College in Magherafelt — posing for photographs at a memorial to two IRA men.

A Twitter post boasting about tearing down a Union flag — described as a “butcher’s apron” by Mr. Bateson in the tweet — also surfaced.

A report in the Sunday World newspaper also quoted a Sperrin Integrated parent as being concerned about Mr. Bateson’s role in teaching history there. …

[Cronos]

While the Irish were busy squabbling among themselves, the Muslims and Africans were walking in the backdoor

What are you talking about? Africans constitute 1.3% of Ireland's population. That's less than Africans (Africans - not African-Americans) in the US

And Muslims are also 1.3% of the population - that's 65,000 - as compared to 2 million Muslims in the USA

Ireland is far, far from lost

I was in Dublin in March and Dublin is heavily multi-cultural, but next to all of the non-Irish I saw were Italians, Eastern Europeans etc. and yes Indians - but they turned out to be mainly Hindus and Catholics

Next, you talk of "rise of abortion" - the abortion laws in Ireland are stricter than the USA (for now).

[x_plus_one]

The joke is on you.

Sinn Fein is the largest political party in Northern Ireland and is highly motivated. They support the Palestinian cause, every socialist agenda and use thug enforcers in the neighborhoods.

There is a reason Stormont has no government for two years, Sinn Fein.

[Olog-hai]

The MPs from Ireland could, and absolutely did, write and pass laws. Those laws were just as binding on England, Scotland and Wales just as much as Ireland, and also the empire at large.

MEPs cannot write a single law. Only the unelected Commission can, and the Commission is also the body that passes laws. Complete opposite of separation of powers.

Ireland sought its independence so they could vote it away in a scant few decades, really?

[Cronos]

The MPs would propose laws and get votes on them, but if they opposed a law, they would be overruled by England who had more votes. In the EU council they get a veto vote

MEPs can propose laws to the EU commission to prepare and bring to vote. The Commission cannot come up with laws on its own.

the commission is NOT the body that passes laws - that is the EU parliament (analgous to US Congress) and the EU council (analogous to the US senate) that does that

Ireland has more independence and power in the EU than it ever had under the English

[Olog-hai]

You don’t get it. There is no separation of powers. Imagine if Congress had to propose laws to the President, who then decides whether to draft a bill? The European Parliament has no legislative power.

We have been over this before. The EU operates exactly the same way the USSR did and Red China does, with the Commission acting as Politburo and the Parliament acting as Supreme Soviet/National People’s Congress.

[Olog-hai]

The Commission absolutely does pass laws all the time. Not every law gets voted on by the European Council, and the Treaty of Lisbon now allows for so-called “qualified majority voting” to shut out the voices of those countries that dissent.

Again, the derivation of the EU was based on the United Nations, which in turn was based on the 1936 USSR constitution. Repeating lies do not make them truth. Ireland has no independence whatsoever; all of its laws at EU level are dictated and they have no say.

[Cronos]

With due respect, you are partially wrong. The Eu parliament does have the legislative power to approve or disapprove laws. You are correct that they don’t posses the power of legislative initiative and can only ratify laws.

The Council and the parliament both have power to block motions or propose amendments.

It does have the right to invite the EU commission to initiate specific legislation which the EU commission MUST do or face sanction at the ECJ.

This would be a problem if the EU was a country. But it’s not a country and its political organisation doesn’t perfectly match the constitutional layout of a parliamentary democracy. The reason why EU institutions are organised like this is because member states still have the last word and the highest degree of power in relation to the big decisions which are made by the EU.

The EU Commission does act in the name of all EU member states, as the EU’s executive arm, but the big decisions on the future of the EU and guidelines on specific policies are decided by national, elected leaders from each country, in their capacity of heads of states and representing their country in the European Council.

If the European Parliament were made to play the same role as a national parliament, it would have to be the sovereign body of the EU in legislative matters and it would supersede the power of national leaders. Since the EU is not a federal state at the moment, it’s probably not necessary yet for the EU parliament to hold so much power. Such a major change in the political layout of the EU would require a change in its treaties, which would need to be approved by national parliaments or by the people of each EU country. So, for the moment, the EU parliament is in this intermediary state, much like the rest of the EU: neither just a body of an international organisation, nor a full-fledged legislative body of a superstate.

[Cronos]

For the first paragraph - can you pass an example of laws not voted on by the EC.

For the second - err.. no, it’s not based on the USSR constitution nor on the UN. it’s more than the UN but less than the USA. It’s closer to the Old Swiss Confederation than anything

[Jim Noble]

The main benefit to Ireland of EU membership was close union with the UK without having to be seen as united with the UK.

[mewzilla]

Sinn Fein hates Israel and loves Iran.

Nuff said.

[Olog-hai]

The Supreme Soviet and National People’s Congress also had power to “approve or disapprove laws”; the process is called rubber-stamping. If the vote was to disapprove, the Politburo came back with the same law under different words, just like the Commission does.

A parliament that cannot write laws is a toy parliament. I am not even partially wrong here.

The EU has a government and is therefore a country. Would anyone say that the USSR was not a country and acted so? It acts in the name of the EU, not of any of its member states (even though it’s conducting the agenda of one member state in particular—hint: it’s the same country where the central bank for the euro is). The Parliament does not have to take the power of national leaders, because the Commission (whose members have to swear a loyalty of allegiance to the EU against their loyalty to their home member state) does that instead.

BTW, what is the purpose of your hijacking a thread about Northern Ireland?

[Cronos]

Yet the Supreme Soviet didn’t have the ability to put the executive in power and the Executive had the ability to put up laws without proposal from the Supreme Soviet

The parliament of a confederation is necessarily different from one of a country. And the parliament is one of the two bodies who can tell the EU commission to prepare laws. the commission can’t propose a law on its own.

The EU technically doesn’t have a government - it has governing structures, but explicitly not a government

[Cronos]

not really - only 12% of Irish products head to the UK (and 25% of Irish imports originate from the UK). The EU has given the Irish the ability to grow their GDP per capita greater than the UK’s

[Olog-hai]

The Politburo never established and disestablished itself. Everything was coordinated between the Presidium, the Politburo, the Council of Ministers (ever wondered where the EU got the idea for their own body by the same name?), the Supreme Soviet and of course the Party Congress.

Of course the EU has a government. Even the Republic of Ireland’s Third Amendment acknowledges this:

No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State necessitated by the obligations of membership of the Communities—or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the Communities or institutions thereof from having the force of law in the State.

Once an external governmental body has the force of law over your country, you are not sovereign. There is also the fact that the EU calls itself a lawmaking body. From Article 17 of the Lisbon Treaty:

1. The Commission shall promote the general interest of the Union and take appropriate initiatives to that end. It shall ensure the application of the Treaties, and of measures adopted by the institutions pursuant to them. It shall oversee the application of Union law under the control of the Court of Justice of the European Union. It shall execute the budget and manage programs. It shall exercise coordinating, executive and management functions, as laid down in the Treaties. With the exception of the common foreign and security policy, and other cases provided for in the Treaties, it shall ensure the Union’s external representation. It shall initiate the Union’s annual and multi-annual programming with a view to achieving inter-institutional agreements.
   
   
2. Union legislative acts may only be adopted on the basis of a Commission proposal, except where the Treaties provide otherwise. Other acts shall be adopted on the basis of a Commission proposal where the Treaties so provide. …

Now again, why are you hijacking this thread?

[Cronos]

The third amendment of the Irish constitution says nothing about the EU having a government. What it does says is that acts done and laws enacted by the communities or institutions - that does not mean the communities are a government in and of itself. Ditto for the Lisbon Treaty, which is explicitly not a constitution thereby invalidating the idea of a superstate. As to the sovereignty - Ireland has a veto vote in the EU, so it de jure participates, changes and agrees with rules set up. This is far more than it had as part of the UK where its vote was that of individuals (parliamentary) and not as a state

[Cronos]

in the same way, Northern Ireland has less influence over the UK, far, far less than RoI has over the confederation of europe

[Olog-hai]

You love to distort the picture, it seems. “Only” 12 percent of those Irish exports makes the UK Ireland’s third largest trading partner behind Belgium and the United States. If the EU did not exist, Ireland’s trade with European countries would most likely be larger, and more flexible via bilateral agreements instead of under the morass of EU regulations as it is now.

What’s behind your hijack of this thread?

[Olog-hai]

Thanks for your opinion.

Got something to say about the actual topic of the thread?

[Cronos]

You’re projecting yourself. I’m not distorting anything, unlike your posts

The UK is a large trading partner for RoI no doubt. However this is at 12% of exports. That’s not the dominating factor like the 50% to 60% of UK exports that head to the other 27 eu member countries.

If the EU did not exist Ireland’s exports would be somewhat similar as it was before it joined in 1972 - with over 60% directed to the UK.

Bilateral agreements are favored one way or the other. Multi-lateral agreements are more even. There is no “morass” - the regulations are no more than what the UK had before for instance

[Cronos]

and this is your hijacking of the thread in post 13 by stating that Irish aims for independence were treasonous - to which I asked if in your opinion the American war of independence was also treasonous