The Privatisation of Irish Politics

Anticoalition wrote:

johnfás wrote:

How would his failure to answer indicate yes? Perhaps he doesn't know, perhaps he doesn't want to comment.

He is speaking on behalf of Libertas. He has a duty to know, or find out, and answer the question, which concerns the use of public money (i.e. our money) by Libertas. We have a right to know.

Failing to answer the simple and reasonable question is an act of avoidance, pure and simple, which to me is a sign of guilt.

So far as cookiemonster has ever revealed to me he isn't an officer of Libertas, merely a supporter. Do you expect every supporter of a political party to know the source of that party's funding?

I don't see how this apparent duty on his part arises. You may have a right to know but you don't have a duty to mandate cookiemonster to say anything. It is likely that he doesn't know anyway.

Failure to answer a question is not a sign of guilt. Beyond which, guilt of what?

Anticoalition wrote:

johnfás wrote:

How would his failure to answer indicate yes? Perhaps he doesn't know, perhaps he doesn't want to comment.

He is speaking on behalf of Libertas. He has a duty to know, or find out, and answer the question, which concerns the use of public money (i.e. our money) by Libertas. We have a right to know.

I am speaking on behalf of myself, a supporter of Libertas. I have no duty to you whatsoever, nor do I have a duty to indulge your lies.

Quote :

Failing to answer the simple and reasonable question is an act of avoidance, pure and simple, which to me is a sign of guilt.

Failing to answer a question the premise of which is a lie and has no foundation in fact is an act of avoiding indulging your wild fanatasy that you have some dirt of Libertas, when you have rather just created something in your head. It may be a sign of guilt to you but your failure to provide even the most tenuious links to prove that your idea may have any truth to it whatsoever is, to me, an indication that you are deluded and that you have just made it up.

johnfás wrote:

Anticoalition wrote:

johnfás wrote:

How would his failure to answer indicate yes? Perhaps he doesn't know, perhaps he doesn't want to comment.

He is speaking on behalf of Libertas. He has a duty to know, or find out, and answer the question, which concerns the use of public money (i.e. our money) by Libertas. We have a right to know.

Failing to answer the simple and reasonable question is an act of avoidance, pure and simple, which to me is a sign of guilt.

So far as cookiemonster has ever revealed to me he isn't an officer of Libertas, merely a supporter. Do you expect every supporter of a political party to know the source of that party's funding?

I don't see how this apparent duty on his part arises. You may have a right to know but you don't have a duty to mandate cookiemonster to say anything. It is likely that he doesn't know anyway.

Failure to answer a question is not a sign of guilt. Beyond which, guilt of what?

It is a pretty basic question, to which there should be a quick and easy answer, for any political party or lobby group that claims to want to reform the EU. If he doesn't know, all he has to do is get in touch with his friends in the party and ask. I would have thought that a party that wants to show itself to be a model of openness and transparency would have ready answers for this type of question. And if they didn't they would want to try and be seen to be helpful.

Cookie has revealed quite a large amount of insider information in the past, when it suited him. He is very quick to go on the attack and accuse me and others of trying to smear them. That is ridiculous when I am in fact asking him a simple question, and not making any accusations, other than to say he is intentionally avoiding the question, for some reason. I have my own opinion of this crowd, but I am here and willing to be persuaded, by facts. Because he refuses to make any good faith effort to answer the question and ascertain the facts, then it is fair for me to assume that he is guilty of hiding something.

cactus flower wrote:

Final warning here that the issue of funding is off topic on this thread. People can ask, reply or not reply as they please on one of the several existing threads that this has already been discussed on.

Sorry, I didn't see your message.

Can you please cut and paste this section of the thread to the appropriate forum, where we can continue it?

Anticoalition wrote:

johnfás wrote:

How would his failure to answer indicate yes? Perhaps he doesn't know, perhaps he doesn't want to comment.

He is speaking on behalf of Libertas. He has a duty to know, or find out, and answer the question, which concerns the use of public money (i.e. our money) by Libertas. We have a right to know.

Failing to answer the simple and reasonable question is an act of avoidance, pure and simple, which to me is a sign of guilt.

I don't agree. I support the Green party, but that does not make me au fait with every aspect of their funding. I would be amazed to find many party supporters who were.

By the way, I think any reference you may have seen to funding of the No campaign by the EU is actually in respect of Kathy Sinnot and SF, both of whom, as far as I know, did indeed benefit from funding from eurosceptical EU Parliament groups.

Hmm. If Libertas do manage to get EU funding as an EU Party, can they spend it on Lisbon II?

cactus flower wrote:

Final warning here that the issue of funding is off topic on this thread. People can ask, reply or not reply as they please on one of the several existing threads that this has already been discussed on.

I don't believe that it is off topic. In the opening post of this thread the poster alluded to the fact that Libertas was funded by the EU as part of his inital introduction to the topic.

cactus flower wrote:

Final warning here that the issue of funding is off topic on this thread. People can ask, reply or not reply as they please on one of the several existing threads that this has already been discussed on.

Apologies - I didn't see that either. Same goes for my post. As an addition to cactus' warning above, I would add the more general observation that threads are not to be used for the purpose of attacking or harassing other posters.

Auditor #9 wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

So far it does seem like a private party with a self appointed leader and paid staff.
Most counties in the 27 links on Libertas.ue lead to a generic page looking for candidates and cash. NO content.

This is what they look like so far - only a few are in the native languages too - Estonia for example.
http://www.libertas.eu/estonia

Surely they'll want candidates and voters who have an interest in the content - policies, manifestos etc. .. maybe they just created those links recently and the site is more of a building site at the moment. Understandable, no ?

On the other side of those pages is the paypal button.

There's indeed a paypal button. Ought to get one here too

Anticoalition wrote:

It is a pretty basic question, to which there should be a quick and easy answer, for any political party or lobby group that claims to want to reform the EU.

It's not a basic question. It's an issue you have fabricated youself and you willnot, because you cannot, provide any instance in which Libertas would have had access to EU funds to run it's No To Lisbon campaign.

Quote :

If he doesn't know, all he has to do is get in touch with his friends in the party and ask.

If I know or not is immaterial, I have no duty to indulge you are your weird fabrications about Libertas. Nor do I see any need nor have any desire to involve anybody else involved with Libertas in your twisted mess of lies and nonsense.

Quote :

I would have thought that a party that wants to show itself to be a model of openness and transparency would have ready answers for this type of question. And if they didn't they would want to try and be seen to be helpful.

I am not the Libertas communications director, if you want press releases you should perhaps direct your questions in that direction.

Quote :

Cookie has revealed quite a large amount of insider information in the past, when it suited him.

Most of which you disregard because it doesn't suit your "Libertas is Evil/Ganley is Satan" agends.

Quote :

He is very quick to go on the attack and accuse me and others of trying to smear them.

It's very easy to do seeing that is your sole agenda here, and suprious questions like this are clear proof of that. No so much should you have any basis of asking a question like that, but you don't and can't have because there isn't one and you are well aware of that.

Quote :

That is ridiculous when I am in fact asking him a simple question. and not making any accusations, or than to say he is intentionally avoiding the question, for some reason.

You are asking a ridiculous question and one which has no basis if fact, You have been unable to prove anything nor point to anything anywhere which may suggest what you are asking may be the case. It's a WIDE area I'm giving to you work with and you can't provide one screed of information which may even indicate that what you are asking may be the case. You have just made up a stupid question to further your stupid agenda. I am, as I have said, under no duty to indulge you iin that.

Quote :

I have my own opinion of this crowd, but I am here and willing to be persuaded, by facts.

You have your own opinion, which you delight in sharing. I have no trust in your stated willingness to be swayed by facts seeing as your previous statements on the Libertas issue are distinctly devoid of them.

Quote :

Because he refuses to make any good faith effort to answer the question and ascertain the facts, then it is fair for me to assume that he is guilty of hiding something.

There is no good faith on your part. You have pulled the question from thin air as nothing exists anywhere which may evern suggest that Libertas had access to EU funds to run their No To Lisbon campaign. It's a total non issue, it has no basis in fact whatsoever and it's nothing more than a figment of your some what twisted but fertile imagination.

Quote :

I'm working on an idea; the privatisation of politics, and Irish politics in particular. On a global scale, we have seen a proliferation of privatisation of government functions, at local, state, and national levels, taking the form of public private partnerships (PPPs). In fact, it is EU policy, to encourage this model of governance, despite the highly questionable results so far.

With the recent upheavals in the financial markets, we have seen unprecedented interventions by Governments in the banking systems and markets, as well as corporations like auto-makers in the US. With regards to the banks, all of the storm has been focused on the public money being used to prop up private profiteers. But there has been very little wind behind efforts to to look into how private entities are reaching into government, and negotiating positions of power, with other peoples money.

But the most striking example of the privatization of politics in Ireland, and Europe, comes in the form of Libertas. Ironically, just when free-market economics have driven us to the precipice, along comes this outfit calling for even less regulation and Government 'interference' with business. Along comes a designer 'political party' out of the blue, which launches itself, and is actually taken seriously by some, despite the fact that it has no candidates and no detailed policies; just a few handy slogans. It can't even be described as a cult of personality, because there are simply no members. There are only employees and players. Yet, the public are being asked for 100 million euros. And that is just the beginning.

The irony is that if we had passed the Lisbon Treaty, that we would have fundamental rights, which would protect us against this type of highly funded attack on Government, and public decision-making. As bad as Irish law has proven, in terms of protecting us from the privatisation of politics, the EU is even weaker. In fact, as far as I know, it funded the Libertas campaign, along with what currently appears to be a single donor. The traditional democratic checks and balances have failed citizens on many fronts, simultaneously. Only an inspiring vision of political integrity can save us now, which is the one thing our government and our new 'Liberator', sorely lack.

The People's Movement seems to be a political response to the current trend, with Patricia McKenna, Aengus O Snodaigh and others teaming up, in an NGO or third party type front. And while I respect the integrity of the members, I remain completely unmoved. So, what now?

It is mentioned, but very much as a subordinate issue.

I'm off, so I'll leave it to the mods remaining on the thread to decide where the funding issue should be discussed.

cookiemonster wrote:

Anticoalition wrote:

It is a pretty basic question, to which there should be a quick and easy answer, for any political party or lobby group that claims to want to reform the EU.

It's not a basic question. It's an issue you have fabricated youself and you willnot, because you cannot, provide any instance in which Libertas would have had access to EU funds to run it's No To Lisbon campaign.

Quote :

If he doesn't know, all he has to do is get in touch with his friends in the party and ask.

If I know or not is immaterial, I have no duty to indulge you are your weird fabrications about Libertas. Nor do I see any need nor have any desire to involve anybody else involved with Libertas in your twisted mess of lies and nonsense.

Quote :

I would have thought that a party that wants to show itself to be a model of openness and transparency would have ready answers for this type of question. And if they didn't they would want to try and be seen to be helpful.

I am not the Libertas communications director, if you want press releases you should perhaps direct your questions in that direction.

Quote :

Cookie has revealed quite a large amount of insider information in the past, when it suited him.

Most of which you disregard because it doesn't suit your "Libertas is Evil/Ganley is Satan" agends.

Quote :

He is very quick to go on the attack and accuse me and others of trying to smear them.

It's very easy to do seeing that is your sole agenda here, and suprious questions like this are clear proof of that. No so much should you have any basis of asking a question like that, but you don't and can't have because there isn't one and you are well aware of that.

Quote :

That is ridiculous when I am in fact asking him a simple question. and not making any accusations, or than to say he is intentionally avoiding the question, for some reason.

You are asking a ridiculous question and one which has no basis if fact, You have been unable to prove anything nor point to anything anywhere which may suggest what you are asking may be the case. It's a WIDE area I'm giving to you work with and you can't provide one screed of information which may even indicate that what you are asking may be the case. You have just made up a stupid question to further your stupid agenda. I am, as I have said, under no duty to indulge you iin that.

Quote :

I have my own opinion of this crowd, but I am here and willing to be persuaded, by facts.

You have your own opinion, which you delight in sharing. I have no trust in your stated willingness to be swayed by facts seeing as your previous statements on the Libertas issue are distinctly devoid of them.

Quote :

Because he refuses to make any good faith effort to answer the question and ascertain the facts, then it is fair for me to assume that he is guilty of hiding something.

There is no good faith on your part. You have pulled the question from thin air as nothing exists anywhere which may evern suggest that Libertas had access to EU funds to run their No To Lisbon campaign. It's a total non issue, it has no basis in fact whatsoever and it's nothing more than a figment of your some what twisted but fertile imagination.

I'll take that as a Yes, we did get EU funding, but No, I don't want to admit it to you. No point in going any further on this. Goodnight Cactus. Sorry about the cookie crumbs all over the sheets.

Anticoalition wrote:

I'll take that as a Yes, we did get EU funding, but No, I don't want to admit it to you. No point in going any further on this. Goodnight Cactus. Sorry about the cookie crumbs all over the sheets.

if you take that as a yes it shows that you have very low standards when it comes to these facts which you profess to seek.

If you don't want to admit that this is a non issue which you have fabricated yourself and if you won't want to provide one article, rule, sentence or indeed anything which may go some way to provide some substance to your question that's fine with me. I can't stop you, but I won't allow you to spew your nonsense uncountered.

Anti-coalition wrote:

I'll take that as a Yes, we did get EU funding, but No, I don't want to admit it to you. No point in going any further on this.

I have to say that since no evidence whatsoever has been presented either to show that Libertas received EU funding, or that anyone has ever even suggested Libertas received EU funding, you'd have to take it as there being no case to answer.

Puppies, now...

cookiemonster wrote:

Anticoalition wrote:

I'll take that as a Yes, we did get EU funding, but No, I don't want to admit it to you. No point in going any further on this. Goodnight Cactus. Sorry about the cookie crumbs all over the sheets.

if you take that as a yes it shows that you have very low standards when it comes to these facts which you profess to seek.

If you don't want to admit that this is a non issue which you have fabricated yourself and if you won't want to provide one article, rule, sentence or indeed anything which may go some way to provide some substance to your question that's fine with me. I can't stop you, but I won't allow you to spew your nonsense uncountered.

I am going to go back to ignoring your trolling, because I don't want to see this site ruined, the way you have managed to ruin politics.ie

ibis wrote:

Anti-coalition wrote:

I'll take that as a Yes, we did get EU funding, but No, I don't want to admit it to you. No point in going any further on this.

I have to say that since no evidence whatsoever has been presented either to show that Libertas received EU funding, or that anyone has ever even suggested Libertas received EU funding, you'd have to take it as there being no case to answer.

Puppies, now...

If it is a non-issue then why has cookie driven us around the bend trying to avoid the question.

If they didn't get EU government funding (ie public money) then say 'no, they didn't get it'.

If he doesn't know, then why doesn't he find out, and inform himself and us, instead of risking seeing the truth told on the next Prime Time, and being embarrassed, again?

cookiemonster wrote:

Anticoalition wrote:

It is a pretty basic question, to which there should be a quick and easy answer, for any political party or lobby group that claims to want to reform the EU.

It's not a basic question. It's an issue you have fabricated youself and you willnot, because you cannot, provide any instance in which Libertas would have had access to EU funds to run it's No To Lisbon campaign.

Quote :

If he doesn't know, all he has to do is get in touch with his friends in the party and ask.

If I know or not is immaterial, I have no duty to indulge you are your weird fabrications about Libertas. Nor do I see any need nor have any desire to involve anybody else involved with Libertas in your twisted mess of lies and nonsense.

Quote :

I would have thought that a party that wants to show itself to be a model of openness and transparency would have ready answers for this type of question. And if they didn't they would want to try and be seen to be helpful.

I am not the Libertas communications director, if you want press releases you should perhaps direct your questions in that direction.

Quote :

Cookie has revealed quite a large amount of insider information in the past, when it suited him.

Most of which you disregard because it doesn't suit your "Libertas is Evil/Ganley is Satan" agends.

Quote :

He is very quick to go on the attack and accuse me and others of trying to smear them.

It's very easy to do seeing that is your sole agenda here, and suprious questions like this are clear proof of that. No so much should you have any basis of asking a question like that, but you don't and can't have because there isn't one and you are well aware of that.

Quote :

That is ridiculous when I am in fact asking him a simple question. and not making any accusations, or than to say he is intentionally avoiding the question, for some reason.

You are asking a ridiculous question and one which has no basis if fact, You have been unable to prove anything nor point to anything anywhere which may suggest what you are asking may be the case. It's a WIDE area I'm giving to you work with and you can't provide one screed of information which may even indicate that what you are asking may be the case. You have just made up a stupid question to further your stupid agenda. I am, as I have said, under no duty to indulge you iin that.

Quote :

I have my own opinion of this crowd, but I am here and willing to be persuaded, by facts.

You have your own opinion, which you delight in sharing. I have no trust in your stated willingness to be swayed by facts seeing as your previous statements on the Libertas issue are distinctly devoid of them.

Quote :

Because he refuses to make any good faith effort to answer the question and ascertain the facts, then it is fair for me to assume that he is guilty of hiding something.

There is no good faith on your part. You have pulled the question from thin air as nothing exists anywhere which may evern suggest that Libertas had access to EU funds to run their No To Lisbon campaign. It's a total non issue, it has no basis in fact whatsoever and it's nothing more than a figment of your some what twisted but fertile imagination.

Unfortunately neither do Libertas, they make a weak attempt to answer the questions about Ganley on the new website but in a very half-hearted way I thinK; Not the level of transparency that we expect from a party which uses Transparency. See Libertas in denial

cookiemonster wrote:

Anticoalition wrote:

I'll take that as a Yes, we did get EU funding, but No, I don't want to admit it to you. No point in going any further on this. Goodnight Cactus. Sorry about the cookie crumbs all over the sheets.

if you take that as a yes it shows that you have very low standards when it comes to these facts which you profess to seek.

If you don't want to admit that this is a non issue which you have fabricated yourself and if you won't want to provide one article, rule, sentence or indeed anything which may go some way to provide some substance to your question that's fine with me. I can't stop you, but I won't allow you to spew your nonsense uncountered.

What do you mean by

Quote :

nonsense

and

Quote :

weird

? These seem to be mantras when not answering a straight question. Is that Libertas policy? are there any other policies besides create media and collect cash?

Anticoalition wrote:

ibis wrote:

Anti-coalition wrote:

I'll take that as a Yes, we did get EU funding, but No, I don't want to admit it to you. No point in going any further on this.

I have to say that since no evidence whatsoever has been presented either to show that Libertas received EU funding, or that anyone has ever even suggested Libertas received EU funding, you'd have to take it as there being no case to answer.

Puppies, now...

If it is a non-issue then why has cookie driven us around the bend trying to avoid the question.

If they didn't get EU government funding (ie public money) then say 'no, the didn't get it'.

If he doesn't know, then why doesn't he find out, and inform himself and us, instead of risking seeing the truth told on the next Prime Time, and being embarrassed, again?

Essentially, I imagine because he (a) doesn't feel he has to answer a non-case, and (b) may not know.

Quote :

Unfortunately neither do Libertas, they make a weak attempt to answer the questions about Ganley on the new website but in a very have hearted way I thinK; Not the level of transparency that we expect from a party which uses Transparency. See Libertas in denial

Now, there was interesting point in the OP, but if this thread turns into another assault on Libertas, I'll close it down. It would be different if such threads led to any kind of substantive discussions, but they don't, and they won't.

Anticoalition wrote:

I am going to go back to ignoring your trolling, because I don't want to see this site ruined, the way you have managed to ruin politics.ie

More nonsense. You can't make up enough to smear Ganley so now you're after me? Pathetic.

Anticoalition wrote:

If it is a non-issue then why has cookie driven us around the bend trying to avoid the question.

Because:

a) there is no issue to address other than your obvious desperate attempt to smear Ganley/Libertas has reach a new now. Now rather than create random issues from things you have read and don't fully understand you are now creating random issues from thing you have made up completely.

b) I'm bored.

Quote :

If they didn't get EU government funding (ie public money) then say 'no, they didn't get it'.

You've yet to provide anything to suggest there is any reason to ask that question. Without anything it remains just some random crap you've made up. It doesn't warrant anything more than outright ridicule.

Quote :

If he doesn't know, then why doesn't he find out, and inform himself and us, instead of risking seeing the truth told on the next Prime Time, and being embarrassed, again?

Prime time was an mebarrasment to only one group, RTE. Nobody else.

Frightened Albanian wrote:

What do you mean by

Quote :

nonsense

Nonsense, noun: Words or language having no meaning or conveying no intelligible ideas/

Quote :

and

Quote :

weird

?

Weird, adjective: of strange or extraordinary character.

Quote :

These seem to be mantras when not answering a straight question.

They seem to be standard features of both yours and Anticoalitions Ganley/Libertas posts.

Quote :

Is that Libertas policy? are there any other policies besides create media and collect cash?

But you say Libertas has no policies, now you're saying they have two. Odd.

ibis wrote:

Anticoalition wrote:

ibis wrote:

Anti-coalition wrote:

I'll take that as a Yes, we did get EU funding, but No, I don't want to admit it to you. No point in going any further on this.

I have to say that since no evidence whatsoever has been presented either to show that Libertas received EU funding, or that anyone has ever even suggested Libertas received EU funding, you'd have to take it as there being no case to answer.

Puppies, now...

If it is a non-issue then why has cookie driven us around the bend trying to avoid the question.

If they didn't get EU government funding (ie public money) then say 'no, the didn't get it'.

If he doesn't know, then why doesn't he find out, and inform himself and us, instead of risking seeing the truth told on the next Prime Time, and being embarrassed, again?

Essentially, I imagine because he (a) doesn't feel he has to answer a non-case, and (b) may not know.

Couldn't it even be possible that (c) he does know, and (d) he doesn't want to expose another weakness in the dogma? It seems like you are taking sides, but no worries. This thread has pretty well been shredded, in typical cookie style, but at least the true colours shine through once again. Hopefully we can get back to a constructive conversation about a the future of Ireland and the EU, and we will find the truth about the EU funding in other places.

Anticoalition wrote:

ibis wrote:

Anticoalition wrote:

If he doesn't know, then why doesn't he find out, and inform himself and us, instead of risking seeing the truth told on the next Prime Time, and being embarrassed, again?

Essentially, I imagine because he (a) doesn't feel he has to answer a non-case, and (b) may not know.

Couldn't it even be possible that (c) he does know, and (d) he doesn't want to expose another weakness in the dogma? It seems like you are taking sides, but no worries.

Ha....! That's nearly funny, taking all with all.

Anticoalition wrote:

This thread has pretty well been shredded, in typical cookie style, but at least the true colours shine through once again. Hopefully we can get back to a constructive conversation about a the future of Ireland and the EU, and we will find the truth about the EU funding in other places.

OK.

Is it a private party? Well it is registered as a limited company and mea culpa for not getting the documents. No one elected a leader so Ganley is self appointed.
The party evolved from a "think tank" the Libertas Institute, Has it wound down or is it a parallel organisation like the Forum on Public Safety in Europe and North America?

To me it seems a private affair but is now looking for candidates and cash and is threatening to run candidates in the EU elections.