Anticoalition wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Anticoalition wrote:

Let's be very clear on this.

1. I can only speak for myself but this is nothing to do with the effin Lisbon Treaty. I was on 'the other site' for two months, minding my own business, which had nothing to do with Libertas or Lisbon, until I ran into a certain moderator, waving a Libertas flag and behaving in an appalling manner, on a very repetitive basis.

2. The main point I made above, was related to Katriona and Ganley, and quotes an article in The Officer, that has not been discussed anywhere yet. It may have a familiar intro, but it makes a point about a major public contract, that has not been discussed here before. Further, while the origin of the contract may appear dubious, there is no doubting that the Louisiana contract is a definite fact.

3. There has never been one post on this or the other site that posited a common theme between all of Ganley's seemingly very diverse business interests. The FACT that the Iraqi and European mobile phone businesses, the Russsian military base purchase and State forestry business, the Albanian Government investment fund privatisation business, and others all have one major thing in common, ie transfer of State resources into private hands, has not been made before, anywhere that I am aware of. It was made because the very point of this entire thread is a new theme - the privatisation of politics in Ireland. These are all examples of privatisation in politics, with regards to one group.

4. A factual question was asked of our Libertas friend here last night, concerning the transfer of EU public money to a private lobby group called Libertas, for the No campaign. Instead of simply saying - 'I don't know, but I will find out' or making any good faith effort to answer the questions, I was instead accused of bad faith. If I made any factual error or omission, then there is a perfect opportunity for any Libertas promoter to set the record straight right here, and say No. That has not happened.

As for repetition, how many times have you heard the same stupid jingles being repeated over and over again by Ganley, concerning the 'corrupt elites' or the need for 'openness and transparency'? He's still at it, and I am still being bombarded by it. I have right to reply to it and show it for the absolute biggest load of crap I have ever heard in my life. It is in the public and national interest to do so - because public money and power is at stake, and we all have active duties as Irish and EU citizens, to protect our nation and confederacy. This is no joke. I am firmly convinced that Libertas represent the biggest threat to Irish and European democracy in modern times, and while people are entitled to vote for who they like, they are also entitled to do so in an informed manner - rather than being rail-roaded and hoodwinked, through inappropriate use of THEIR OWN TAXPAPERS MONEY, and possible inappropriate use of private, foreign money.

Holding such views have you have is perfectly fine, so long as there is a factual basis to them (I myself am no fan of the right-wing ethos that Ganley seems to espouse in terms of labour relations). But it's the extent of the thing I have a problem with. I'm not disputing that you started over there on the Tara issue, laudable enough stuff, and then switched focus. But now when I see your name on the latest discussions page I can be nearly 100% confident that the post will be about Ganley. You and others have given him publicity here and there that wouldn't otherwise be the case, and I don't need to quote the Oscar Wilde thing at you. It's the spamming I object to, not the general sentiment, if backed by evidence.

The reason you see me posting on the Libertas issue, is because I have decided, in the face of what I see as such a threat to our system, to engage with it, and combat it. Yes, I am on a mission here, for the moment, to expose the sham that is Libertas, and I make no apologies for that. However, don't hold me responsible for what others are posting, and their motivations for doing so. If you actually go back and look at previous use of the repeated references above, you will see that they were made by third parties, not me. I simply took an opportunity to tie together a number of previously unrelated facts or references, and place them into one coherent argument. Anyway, I was about to give myself and yourselves a break, and am still trying to drag myself away from the computer and engage with Christmas trees, hot whiskies and conspicuous consumption, and would like to do so on good terms, but I keep getting sucked back in here So, once more with feeling, Merry Christmas all and a Happy New Year, again.

Fair enough, I'll leave you to the mince pies, happy Christmas and a peaceful New Year to you and yours....

Cheers Anti-coalition.

I'm not going to apologise for posting about Ganley and Libertas. I am very interested to see the political direction of this outfit as it emerges. If Ganley was open about anything, it would have saved some of us a lot of time and energy in trying to work out where he is coming from.

His latest announcement that he and Libertas is Centrist appears to me to be such a blatant misrepresentation that it warrants systematic and thorough response, unless evidence appears to prove me wrong.

Anticoalition wrote:

Let's be very clear on this.

*sigh*

Quote :

1. I can only speak for myself but this is nothing to do with the effin Lisbon Treaty.

And I for myself, yet you constantly expect me to answer every question you have about Libertas, even the made up stuff.

Quote :

I was on 'the other site' for two months, minding my own business, which had nothing to do with Libertas or Lisbon, until I ran into a certain moderator, waving a Libertas flag and behaving in an appalling manner, on a very repetitive basis.

Awh, aren't you precious. You started a thread about Tara Watch running a candidate in the Euorpean elections. I questioned how wise that would be and suggested that it would be much more effective for Tarawatch to run a candidate in the local or national elections instead and you then went apeshit ranting and raving about Libertas and Ganley and you have continued ever since.

Quote :

2. The main point I made above, was related to Katriona and Ganley, and quotes an article in The Officer, that has not been discussed anywhere yet. It may have a familiar intro, but it makes a point about a major public contract, that has not been discussed here before. Further, while the origin of the contract may appear dubious, there is no doubting that the Louisiana contract is a definite fact.

I doubt there is a person here who doesn't have at least a brief idea about Declan Ganley's business outside Libertas. It's nothing new and it's nothing to do with Libertas. But you insist on bringing it and similar stuff up again and again for no obvious reason other than to attempt to cast Ganley in ill light.

Quote :

3. There has never been one post on this or the other site that posited a common theme between all of Ganley's seemingly very diverse business interests. The FACT that the Iraqi and European mobile phone businesses, the Russsian military base purchase and State forestry business, the Albanian Government investment fund privatisation business, and others all have one major thing in common, ie transfer of State resources into private hands, has not been made before, anywhere that I am aware of. It was made because the very point of this entire thread is a new theme - the privatisation of politics in Ireland. These are all examples of privatisation in politics, with regards to one group.

Well you are wrong, of course, on a number of points. The Iraqi issue had nothing to do with transfer of State resources because there existed neither a mobile phone netowork nor a first responder network in Iraq in either publis or private ownership. Again with the European mobile licences, they were awarded by the state, but no state resources were transfered into private hands. That is the reason the link has not been made before, because it doesn't exist.
Also, the Forest, Anglo Adriatic etc are not examples of privatisation of politics in Ireland or elsewhere. The first may well be about the sale of state assets but the second was intended to allow holders of privatisation vouchers to collectively invest in state assets which were to be privatised. So far as politics has an impact on anything I don't see how this could possibly constitute as "privatisation of politics". It seems to me that it is, yet again, another spurious and fantastic attempt to spread lies about Ganley and Libertas under the cover of a "real" issue.

Quote :

4. A factual question was asked of our Libertas friend here last night, concerning the transfer of EU public money to a private lobby group called Libertas, for the No campaign. Instead of simply saying - 'I don't know, but I will find out' or making any good faith effort to answer the questions, I was instead accused of bad faith. If I made any factual error or omission, then there is a perfect opportunity for any Libertas promoter to set the record straight right here, and say No. That has not happened.

Firstly, it was not a "factual question" it was a nonsense question which you dreamed up and one which you could provide not one single bit of evidence, not one quote, not one paragraph, not one little hint no matter how tenuious that it may actually be the case. Not one. You fabricated an issue for no other reason than to spread doubt, likes and damaging smear against Libertas.

Quote :

As for repetition, how many times have you heard the same stupid jingles being repeated over and over again by Ganley, concerning the 'corrupt elites' or the need for 'openness and transparency'? He's still at it, and I am still being bombarded by it.

No, you are not. Nobody is forcing it upon you.

Quote :

I have right to reply to it and show it for the absolute biggest load of crap I have ever heard in my life.

And I the same for your posts.

Quote :

It is in the public and national interest to do so - because public money and power is at stake, and we all have active duties as Irish and EU citizens, to protect our nation and confederacy.

Against whatm exactly? Against the monster you have created in your head?

Quote :

This is no joke.

Oh I think it is.

Quote :

I am firmly convinced that Libertas represent the biggest threat to Irish and European democracy in modern times, and while people are entitled to vote for who they like, they are also entitled to do so in an informed manner - rather than being rail-roaded and hoodwinked, through inappropriate use of THEIR OWN TAXPAPERS MONEY, and possible inappropriate use of private, foreign money.

Well putting aside the fantastic hyperbole at the beginning there, you have again made many factual errors.
Firstlym what "taxpayers money"? What "inappropriate use" and what "private, foreign money"? You have, once again, not a single shread of evidence, not a single solitary tenuious link anwhere that there is any inappropriate use of taxpayer or private foreign money. That is yet another little "fact" you've made up for us, how kind you are.

Anticoalition wrote:

You have hit the nail on the head, but from the opposite direction. The reason I left p.ie was mainly because of CM.

Well at least I did something right. But I suspect the reason you left p.ie was because the people there saw through you for the liar and the spoofer that you are.

Quote :

I found myself hounded to death, and every time I started a thread, or tried to engage in any intelligent discussion, those threads were literally shredded and I was subjected to unprecedented personal abuse.

You were questioned and countered for the wild and untrue claims you were making about Declan Ganley and about Libertas.

Quote :

It got so bad that I actually tried to completely ignore the guy and refused to engage him in discussion, but he still harassed me.

No, what you did was disrupt a load of threads and break the site's rules by starting threads asking people to boycott me. You accused me of biased moderation, yet never managed to provide a single instance where this was the case - are we seeing a theme here?

Quote :

You will also note above, in my last direct reply to CM, that I am going back to ignoring him, because I do not want this site to turn into the trollfest we regularly see on p.ie.

You can ignore me, I don't care. But I will not ignore your stream of lies about Libertas and Declan Ganley.

Quote :

Even if you look at the discussion with him above, you will see that I asked a straight question, and then got multiple questions, and more personal abuse, in response.

You asked a completely nonsense question which had no basis in fact and I told you that that was the case, I asked for anything which was written or said by anybody, anywhere which suggested that it might be the case and you could not provide anything. And why could you not provide this? because it was a non-issue you fabricated yourself.

Quote :

He is the creator of his own destiny, but I am keeping him as far away from mine as possible, and will not be engaging directly with him in any way whatsoever, on this or any other site.

And you the creator of many lies. I don't care if you don't engage with me, I will counter each and every lie you come up with about Libertas and about Declan Ganley.

Quote :

Naturally, he will come along and try and drive any rational discussion of Libertas into confusion, or the gutter, but I will not get sucked in again.

I don't believe you are capable of "rational" discussion about Libertas. Already a few quotes above you have proven once again you can't even make a simple comment about Libertas without restorting to wild lies.

Quote :

Please be vigilant here, because as far as I am concerned he is an absolute menace.

Whatever, as far as I am concerned you are a liar and a spoofer, you have no credibility whatsoever. Your "facts" and your "truths" are anything but and nobody should believe a word you say.

Anticoalition wrote:

The reason you see me posting on the Libertas issue, is because I have decided, in the face of what I see as such a threat to our system, to engage with it, and combat it.

That's fine, but you haven't been able to provide any proof that any threat exists, you have resorted to smear and lies to "combat" the precieved threat.

Quote :

Yes, I am on a mission here, for the moment, to expose the sham that is Libertas, and I make no apologies for that.

Do you apologise for the crap you have been posting which is nothing more then fabricated nonsense and purposely misrepresented information?

Quote :

However, don't hold me responsible for what others are posting, and their motivations for doing so. If you actually go back and look at previous use of the repeated references above, you will see that they were made by third parties, not me. I simply took an opportunity to tie together a number of previously unrelated facts or references, and place them into one coherent argument.

What you've done is taken some yard and attempted to make an umberella. There is no coherence, little relevence, few if any facts and a whole lot on innuendo and lies. They are previously unrelated because they are unrelated.

Quote :

Anyway, I was about to give myself and yourselves a break, and am still trying to drag myself away from the computer and engage with Christmas trees, hot whiskies and conspicuous consumption, and would like to do so on good terms, but I keep getting sucked back in here So, once more with feeling, Merry Christmas all and a Happy New Year, again.

You've said that several times now and much like a lot of what you say repeating it hasn't made it true.

The questions about Libertas , its policies and its leaders past associations still need to be clarified. Vindictive is a poor substitute for facts Cookiemonster

Frightened Albanian wrote:

The questions about Libertas , its policies and its leaders past associations still need to be clarified. Vindictive is a poor substitute for facts Cookiemonster

What the **** (mod - cf) are you on about now. I have told you that Libertas will be publish policy soon. You have made numerous comments on http://www.libertas.eu and you know that that is exactly what it says there, thet policy will be published in the coming months. How thick do you have to be not to accept that? You can discuss it all you like once it's published. Making up stuff yourself in the mean time isn't really constructive.

Declan's "past associations" are a matter of public record, and if they weren't before they are now. But I don't see what they have to do with anything really, guilty by association doesn't float no matter how much you wish it would. And finally, lies are not facts so how about yourself and Anticoalition lay off them a bit?

What are the lies and the inventions, exactly ?

cookiemonster wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

The questions about Libertas , its policies and its leaders past associations still need to be clarified. Vindictive is a poor substitute for facts Cookiemonster

What the **** (mod - cf) are you on about now. I have told you that Libertas will be publish policy soon. You have made numerous comments on http://www.libertas.eu and you know that that is exactly what it says there, thet policy will be published in the coming months. How thick do you have to be not to accept that? You can discuss it all you like once it's published. Making up stuff yourself in the mean time isn't really constructive.

Declan's "past associations" are a matter of public record, and if they weren't before they are now. But I don't see what they have to do with anything really, guilty by association doesn't float no matter how much you wish it would. And finally, lies are not facts so how about yourself and Anticoalition lay off them a bit?

You're not doing your argument, or the site, any favours by cursing at other posters.

Time to send in the cleaners...

ibis wrote:

You're not doing your argument, or the site, any favours by cursing at other posters.

Indeed I am not, I apologise. Thanks for the clean up.

cookiemonster wrote:

ibis wrote:

You're not doing your argument, or the site, any favours by cursing at other posters.

Indeed I am not, I apologise. Thanks for the clean up.

Any time, cookiemonster

cookiemonster wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

The questions about Libertas , its policies and its leaders past associations still need to be clarified. Vindictive is a poor substitute for facts Cookiemonster

What the **** (mod - cf) are you on about now. I have told you that Libertas will be publish policy soon. You have made numerous comments on http://www.libertas.eu and you know that that is exactly what it says there, thet policy will be published in the coming months. How thick do you have to be not to accept that? You can discuss it all you like once it's published. Making up stuff yourself in the mean time isn't really constructive.

Declan's "past associations" are a matter of public record, and if they weren't before they are now. But I don't see what they have to do with anything really, guilty by association doesn't float no matter how much you wish it would. And finally, lies are not facts so how about yourself and Anticoalition lay off them a bit?

The reason you are losing it is that there is a lot more to be ascertained and the Libertas.eu site does not answer the questions. They contradict evidence from third party independent press especially regarding Albania. There is still much that does not jibe. What about the non Albanian investors ? They are not mentioned but Ganley claiamed in 1997 thta he had 40,00 foreign investors, what did they invest and where is it now?

You are also collecting money without haviing a public policy. Is there a private one shared with the faithful? What is that?

Frightened Albanian wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

The questions about Libertas , its policies and its leaders past associations still need to be clarified. Vindictive is a poor substitute for facts Cookiemonster

What the **** (mod - cf) are you on about now. I have told you that Libertas will be publish policy soon. You have made numerous comments on http://www.libertas.eu and you know that that is exactly what it says there, thet policy will be published in the coming months. How thick do you have to be not to accept that? You can discuss it all you like once it's published. Making up stuff yourself in the mean time isn't really constructive.

Declan's "past associations" are a matter of public record, and if they weren't before they are now. But I don't see what they have to do with anything really, guilty by association doesn't float no matter how much you wish it would. And finally, lies are not facts so how about yourself and Anticoalition lay off them a bit?

The reason you are losing it is that there is a lot more to be ascertained and the Libertas.eu site does not answer the questions. They contradict evidence from third party independent press especially regarding Albania. There is still much that does not jibe. What about the non Albanian investors ? They are not mentioned but Ganley claiamed in 1997 thta he had 40,00 foreign investors, what did they invest and where is it now?

This is a) another non-issue which has been fabricated and b)something you've already brought up and I have already addressed.

Quote :

You are also collecting money without haviing a public policy. Is there a private one shared with the faithful? What is that?

Donate some money and see...

ibis wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

The questions about Libertas , its policies and its leaders past associations still need to be clarified. Vindictive is a poor substitute for facts Cookiemonster

What the **** (mod - cf) are you on about now. I have told you that Libertas will be publish policy soon. You have made numerous comments on http://www.libertas.eu and you know that that is exactly what it says there, thet policy will be published in the coming months. How thick do you have to be not to accept that? You can discuss it all you like once it's published. Making up stuff yourself in the mean time isn't really constructive.

Declan's "past associations" are a matter of public record, and if they weren't before they are now. But I don't see what they have to do with anything really, guilty by association doesn't float no matter how much you wish it would. And finally, lies are not facts so how about yourself and Anticoalition lay off them a bit?

You're not doing your argument, or the site, any favours by cursing at other posters.

Cookiemonster, theres no need to lose your cool. Did you ever hear the saying that who ever loses their cool in an argument loses the argument. Certainly I find your defense of Libertas unconvincing.

The facts are that Declan Ganley misled the Irish people regarding the Lisbon Treaty. It has been discussed and proven at length in many discussions on this website. He has promised to provide full information on funding etc and hasn't. Whenever he has provided some information on funding it has contradicted pervious statements he has made. I myself am worried about Ganley and what his true objectives are, and I dont say why you are trying to bully people away from discussing him.

Ah Jayus Lads - can we give this whole Libertas craic a rest?

A) - for the anti-Libertas gang - every word you write is just giving them more publicity - 90% of the population havent a clue who Libertas are - most of them fell for the Coir and SF arguments in the Last Referendum campaign - Libertas were a sideshow who completely failed in the target constituency and Declan Ganley is just another talking head and IMO its just the Late Jimmy Goldsmith circa 1994 all over again - one big shock splash - talks about uniting the whole Europe behind anti-Brussels banner and then a spectacular belly flop at the next electoral test followed by a swift retreat into the shadows in the near after - I'll bet my first born son on the same happening this time.

Cookie - take a chill pill and ease off will ya - Deco has not answered any question relating to his past to anybodys satisfaction and the fact that Libertas have to respond in their website in the form of others peoples questions just emphasises that - come out with some real detailed policies and folks would start taking you seriously and not being so suspicious - you're taking this all too personally for a person who only signed up yesterday relatively speaking - First love and all that - but stand back and take a bit of perspective here - Im s member of FG - but for fks sake - if we had no policies and Endas financial and public life was as , how shall I put it, non defined as Dec- well Id have me crash helmet on too and would have to take the brickbats coming my way

my two cents - over and out

cookiemonster wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

The questions about Libertas , its policies and its leaders past associations still need to be clarified. Vindictive is a poor substitute for facts Cookiemonster

What the **** (mod - cf) are you on about now. I have told you that Libertas will be publish policy soon. You have made numerous comments on http://www.libertas.eu and you know that that is exactly what it says there, thet policy will be published in the coming months. How thick do you have to be not to accept that? You can discuss it all you like once it's published. Making up stuff yourself in the mean time isn't really constructive.

Declan's "past associations" are a matter of public record, and if they weren't before they are now. But I don't see what they have to do with anything really, guilty by association doesn't float no matter how much you wish it would. And finally, lies are not facts so how about yourself and Anticoalition lay off them a bit?

The reason you are losing it is that there is a lot more to be ascertained and the Libertas.eu site does not answer the questions. They contradict evidence from third party independent press especially regarding Albania. There is still much that does not jibe. What about the non Albanian investors ? They are not mentioned but Ganley claiamed in 1997 thta he had 40,00 foreign investors, what did they invest and where is it now?

This is a) another non-issue which has been fabricated and b)something you've already brought up and I have already addressed.

Quote :

You are also collecting money without haviing a public policy. Is there a private one shared with the faithful? What is that?

Donate some money and see...

No you have not addressed it,did the foreign investors invest cash ? Why are they not mentioned in relation to Anglo Adriatic Investment Fund on Libertas.eu?

Frightened Albanian wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

The questions about Libertas , its policies and its leaders past associations still need to be clarified. Vindictive is a poor substitute for facts Cookiemonster

What the **** (mod - cf) are you on about now. I have told you that Libertas will be publish policy soon. You have made numerous comments on http://www.libertas.eu and you know that that is exactly what it says there, thet policy will be published in the coming months. How thick do you have to be not to accept that? You can discuss it all you like once it's published. Making up stuff yourself in the mean time isn't really constructive.

Declan's "past associations" are a matter of public record, and if they weren't before they are now. But I don't see what they have to do with anything really, guilty by association doesn't float no matter how much you wish it would. And finally, lies are not facts so how about yourself and Anticoalition lay off them a bit?

The reason you are losing it is that there is a lot more to be ascertained and the Libertas.eu site does not answer the questions. They contradict evidence from third party independent press especially regarding Albania. There is still much that does not jibe. What about the non Albanian investors ? They are not mentioned but Ganley claiamed in 1997 thta he had 40,00 foreign investors, what did they invest and where is it now?

This is a) another non-issue which has been fabricated and b)something you've already brought up and I have already addressed.

Quote :

You are also collecting money without haviing a public policy. Is there a private one shared with the faithful? What is that?

Donate some money and see...

No you have not addressed it,did the foreign investors invest cash ? Why are they not mentioned in relation to Anglo Adriatic Investment Fund on Libertas.eu?

I have, but your mental acuity may not be up to much and you may not remember. You seem to repeat yourself an awful lot so one assumes this to be the case.

Edo wrote:

Ah Jayus Lads - can we give this whole Libertas craic a rest?

A) - for the anti-Libertas gang - every word you write is just giving them more publicity - 90% of the population havent a clue who Libertas are - most of them fell for the Coir and SF arguments in the Last Referendum campaign - Libertas were a sideshow who completely failed in the target constituency and Declan Ganley is just another talking head and IMO its just the Late Jimmy Goldsmith circa 1994 all over again - one big shock splash - talks about uniting the whole Europe behind anti-Brussels banner and then a spectacular belly flop at the next electoral test followed by a swift retreat into the shadows in the near after - I'll bet my first born son on the same happening this time.

Cookie - take a chill pill and ease off will ya - Deco has not answered any question relating to his past to anybodys satisfaction and the fact that Libertas have to respond in their website in the form of others peoples questions just emphasises that - come out with some real detailed policies and folks would start taking you seriously and not being so suspicious - you're taking this all too personally for a person who only signed up yesterday relatively speaking - First love and all that - but stand back and take a bit of perspective here - Im s member of FG - but for fks sake - if we had no policies and Endas financial and public life was as , how shall I put it, non defined as Dec- well Id have me crash helmet on too and would have to take the brickbats coming my way

my two cents - over and out

Anyone going to address Edo's post ?

Auditor #9 wrote:

Edo wrote:

Ah Jayus Lads - can we give this whole Libertas craic a rest?

A) - for the anti-Libertas gang - every word you write is just giving them more publicity - 90% of the population havent a clue who Libertas are - most of them fell for the Coir and SF arguments in the Last Referendum campaign - Libertas were a sideshow who completely failed in the target constituency and Declan Ganley is just another talking head and IMO its just the Late Jimmy Goldsmith circa 1994 all over again - one big shock splash - talks about uniting the whole Europe behind anti-Brussels banner and then a spectacular belly flop at the next electoral test followed by a swift retreat into the shadows in the near after - I'll bet my first born son on the same happening this time.

Cookie - take a chill pill and ease off will ya - Deco has not answered any question relating to his past to anybodys satisfaction and the fact that Libertas have to respond in their website in the form of others peoples questions just emphasises that - come out with some real detailed policies and folks would start taking you seriously and not being so suspicious - you're taking this all too personally for a person who only signed up yesterday relatively speaking - First love and all that - but stand back and take a bit of perspective here - Im s member of FG - but for fks sake - if we had no policies and Endas financial and public life was as , how shall I put it, non defined as Dec- well Id have me crash helmet on too and would have to take the brickbats coming my way

my two cents - over and out

Anyone going to address Edo's post ?

I think he's wrong.

Edo wrote:

Ah Jayus Lads - can we give this whole Libertas craic a rest?

A) - for the anti-Libertas gang - every word you write is just giving them more publicity - 90% of the population havent a clue who Libertas are - most of them fell for the Coir and SF arguments in the Last Referendum campaign - t

Edo, its not as simple as that. I have a member of Cori living close to me. I get on well with her but politically shes for the birds. Anyway her house is still full of t-shirts, bollons, pens, flyers etc all with anti-lisbon treaty messages on it. She spent day after day at train stations and street corners giving it away and still she has it. She can keep it for the next time. But it was Libertas that supplied her with all this stuff, therefore not only is Ganley bankrolling Libertas hes doing the same for Coir. Now do you understand the threat the contry is facing?

While I am interested in how Libertas was funded - because it bears directly on the state of our political funding laws - I don't understand the fascination with where Ganley made his money in the first place.

Art wrote:

Edo wrote:

Ah Jayus Lads - can we give this whole Libertas craic a rest?

A) - for the anti-Libertas gang - every word you write is just giving them more publicity - 90% of the population havent a clue who Libertas are - most of them fell for the Coir and SF arguments in the Last Referendum campaign - t

Edo, its not as simple as that. I have a member of Cori living close to me. I get on well with her but politically shes for the birds. Anyway her house is still full of t-shirts, bollons, pens, flyers etc all with anti-lisbon treaty messages on it. She spent day after day at train stations and street corners giving it away and still she has it. She can keep it for the next time. But it was Libertas that supplied her with all this stuff, therefore not only is Ganley bankrolling Libertas hes doing the same for Coir. Now do you understand the threat the contry is facing?

Can I ask you how you know that?

She told me Libertas gave her the stuff. And I saw her giving out at the stations and on street corners.

Oh great, another one.

Well I assume, Anticoalition has a habit of reinventing himself...

Art wrote:

She told me Libertas gave her the stuff. And I saw her giving out at the stations and on street corners.

These were Libertas branded items, yes?