|
|
Blog Feeds
Anti-Empire
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international edition
|
Has the Ref con been doctored? If so when? And how? national |
miscellaneous |
news report
 Monday October 14, 2002 19:06 by Dr Goebells
 Who butchered the Referendum commission? And when did they get away with this after Nice 1? The big 3 or 4 political parties and the Ref Con are using blatant propaganda, and people are not informed on the issues of Nice, what is happening with the ref con media ads is Goebbelesque. Allan Dukes and other ff and fg politicians claimed in Nice 1 that the Referendum commission ‘confused’ people by giving them both the yes and the no sides of the Nice referendum, the blueshirts and ff’ers were vocal is calling for the Referendum commission to be changed in order to prevent them giving the arguments against Nice 2. What I want to know is what exactly happened that allowed them to only present one side of the debate in this referendum? and most ordinary voters like me have no clue about how (or even if) this has occurred either, although the slightly more perceptive have remarked that it seems a ‘bit’ one sided.
|
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (6 of 6)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6The Ref Com during the last referendum filled two roles. It provided unbiased information (Allegedly) and put forward the arguments of both sides. Between Nice I and Nice II 'This time it's so very personal' the government removed the obligation to put forward the arguments of both sides and it was restricted to providing the fair, neutral, unbiased information and unchallenged facts that we know, love and respect the Commission for.
everytime they hear that woman from the Ref. Commission saying that if Nice is passed, our nutrallity will be protected and `enshrined in our constitution`? The nerve of these people!
This is how they did it:
http://www.gov.ie/debates-01/14dec/sect2.htm#ref
passed in one day so it would be there in time so they could try and fool us on the abortion referendum.
Comes Defcom 1
The neutrality one is good, but I think the 'political' reality statement regarding enlargement is great. While accepting there is a legal ambiguity, the refcom presents politics as fact -
'In a completely neutral, unbiased, objective manner we have to say that you can ignore all this legal stuff and accept that this treaty is about enlargment because the politicians say it is.'
And we pay to get told this??
What the ref con is doing would do credit to a stalinist or fascist state controlled propaganda apparatus.