Libertas a pan European Project : Read OP Intro Carefully - Mod

Jamie Smyth's article - more smear and innuendo. Littlered with 'apparentlys' and other rhetorical devices aimed at planting defamatory ideas in the minds of the readers - again it is another exmaple of a piece written with lawyers looking over the shoulder. Full of IT style indignation when confronted with people who deviate from its editorial line - the impertinence of them! And fancy the EU giving credence and legitimacy to all these insubordinates refusing to do and think as they are told. The money is well spent on our own parties but not on any we dont approve of.

Anyway, re the Article 40 protocol - there is one major problem with it and how it relates to Lisbon. People are seeking clarification on the meaning of terms like 'life', 'unborn', 'privacy' and so forth. This can only be done through the courts. If it is decided by a European court that life begins at five months or whatever, then nothing in that ruling would be consistent with Irish law.

Amendment 28 of the Irish Constitution under the proposed Lisbon Treaty ratification, defeated last June, specifically states the following:

"No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union referred to in subsection 10 of this section, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the said European Union or by institutions thereof, or by bodies competent under the treaties referred to in this section, from having the force of law in the State."

That is a straightforward trumping of Irish Law and of the constituion itself. A lot of other things would be affected by it too. It's entirely resonable for Sinnott and other pro-lifers to worry that the Masstricht Protocol is nullified by this. She has never once stated that the Treaty categorcially targets abortion law - only that it looks quite possible that it could be challenged successfully. The hysteria is all from the yes side, imho, who behave as if asking intelligent questions were an outrage and have only one response to those who do: having the screaming ab dabs about them in the pages of the national news papers and anywhere else they can find an outlet for their ire. Shooting messengers is the order of the day. It's an ugly spectacle and one which it must be hoped will backfire on them.

Did you mean to post this on the abortion thread Aragon?

cactus flower wrote:

Did you mean to post this on the abortion thread Aragon?

No - I put it here because it is about the Lisbon Treaty and how it affects the abortion issue. The other thread was to be about abortion per se - not about Lisbon at all. My own fault because by bringing Sinnott up it led to discussion of her abortion stance in Europe. Maybe you havent seen all of the posts on the other thread! I just put more or less the same question to you about your last comment over there

Aragon wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Did you mean to post this on the abortion thread Aragon?

No - I put it here because it is about the Lisbon Treaty and how it affects the abortion issue. The other thread was to be about abortion per se - not about Lisbon at all. My own fault because by bringing Sinnott up it led to discussion of her abortion stance in Europe. Maybe you havent seen all of the posts on the other thread! I just put more or less the same question to you about your last comment over there

Aragon - this thread isn't about the Lisbon Treaty at all. Its about the Libertas Pan European Party. No one is discussing Lisbon here. We have other threads that are about Lisbon.
Have I still got the wrong idea about what the other thread is?

cookiemonster wrote:

Jamie Smyth predicting Libertas implosion yet again and some more weird quotes from Andrew "Mr. Democracy" Duff*. Wow, really cutting edge stuff all around there.

*yawn*


*Refers to Mr. Andrew Duff MEP for UK/Liberal Democrats

Articles in one paper, another attempt to sue, Christ's ambasadors, BCC daning to Ganley's whining about people asking questions, 100% vindication of RTE, and a recap of the crappy week the Libertas EU effort got last week.

The Way of the Tao is evident in the collapse of Libertas as a credible party. In fact rather than being the victim of elites or anything else it is ther own and ganley's own poor judgement and secrecy that are undoing his best efforts.

So that's two gigs in one week, anyone off to the High Court? Will the "injured party" be there himself whinging about being badly done too?

One clear thing from the Bcc judgement is that he can be investigated in a democracy, it is normal.
I believe Libertas are trawling the web these days for slights on the master.

Thursday there's the Phil at TCD. What's on next week, I need more warning

cactus flower wrote:

Aragon wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Did you mean to post this on the abortion thread Aragon?

No - I put it here because it is about the Lisbon Treaty and how it affects the abortion issue. The other thread was to be about abortion per se - not about Lisbon at all. My own fault because by bringing Sinnott up it led to discussion of her abortion stance in Europe. Maybe you havent seen all of the posts on the other thread! I just put more or less the same question to you about your last comment over there

Aragon - this thread isn't about the Lisbon Treaty at all. Its about the Libertas Pan European Party. No one is discussing Lisbon here. We have other threads that are about Lisbon.
Have I still got the wrong idea about what the other thread is?

Sorry - my thread reference was wrong - I meant Ganley/Libertas/Lisbon-thread - all of these issues have been thrown up here - I shorhanded it to 'Lisbon' thinking it would be obvious, which it wasn't.

No problem. Its probably about time some of those old Lisbon threads were kicked back into life.

cactus flower wrote:

No problem. Its probably about time some of those old Lisbon threads were kicked back into life.

Oh please, they'll all just end up as conduits to have a go at Ganley/Libertas anyway.

cookiemonster wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

No problem. Its probably about time some of those old Lisbon threads were kicked back into life.

Oh please, they'll all just end up as conduits to have a go at Ganley/Libertas anyway.

Ooouu speaking of which I think it's time for a Spring Clean - time to weld all the Ganley threads together into one giant epic thread on the Man:

Declan Ganley : The Only Thread You'll Ever Ever Need




Other thread names are welcome of course.

cookiemonster wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

No problem. Its probably about time some of those old Lisbon threads were kicked back into life.

Oh please, they'll all just end up as conduits to have a go at Ganley/Libertas anyway.

As the Bcc says people are allowed to do. Don't sound so dejected there are other parties. You could even satrt one with policies and a more savoury bunch of chaps involved and it might even get some support. The bald one sunk you from the beginning really.

Auditor #9 wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

No problem. Its probably about time some of those old Lisbon threads were kicked back into life.

Oh please, they'll all just end up as conduits to have a go at Ganley/Libertas anyway.

Ooouu speaking of which I think it's time for a Spring Clean - time to weld all the Ganley threads together into one giant epic thread on the Man:

Declan Ganley : The Only Thread You'll Ever Ever Need

Other thread names are welcome of course.

We've already had at least one called that, haven't we?

Well dig up the locked ones and fuse! there were some greta links on the one from 08

FYI johnfas Nothing is sub judice in this matter at this stage. Perhaps it would be prudeant not to publish the article until tomorrow lunchtime but there can be no reason for us not to discuss what we like. The Irish Times did so today.

I have been looking into this Iraqi stuff again and am currently on page 17 of a 30 odd page brief which gives a blow by blow account of one set of events relating to Guardian/ Liberty/ Nana and Iraq bids.

the pro Libertas Shaw said things like

Quote :

Any additional Bechtel effort will have to be built on
this foundation, as Senator Stevens will confirm when he arrives in Baghdad. His office is
not pleased with the way you have tried to manipulate the process to promote your own projects (and threaten the
Eskimos)

more later

People Korps has some great links Declan Ganley The Iraqi Years
Sudnick Shaw Ganley Iraqi Freedom baby

EYE RACKI

or for Mac users iRac

There was a US inquiry (FBI) into this, was there not, and Declan Ganley was not found to have breached any laws?

That email is interesting reading, given the context of the battle to acquire enormously valuable mobile licences in Iraq. It went to the British in the end, didn't it, in spite of attempts to overturn their successful bid with allegations of corruption - ? allegations found to be untrue?

Big business is in general cut throat. The stakes are huge in something like mobile phone licenses - almost a licence to print money in some cases. I would have been equally unsurprised if the allegations by Ganley's group had proven true.

Breaking ganley and Village action settled, Villlgae to give |Ganley right to reply

More on People Korps from High Court No. 7 Here http://peoplekorps.blogspot.com/2009/02/ganleyv-village-magazine-settled.html

Ganley and Village Magazine settle dispute
Belfast Telegraph

Wednesday, 11 February 2009

Declan Ganley of Libertas has resolved his dispute with the Village Magazine over an article which was critical of him and described him as a "snakeoil salesman". The offending article appeared in the latest edition of Village published on Friday, and Mr Ganley said it had made "very serious allegations" concerning his business dealings in Iraq.He brought an application to force the magazine to withdraw all copies of the edition, saying the article made him out to be "dishonest, a liar and a fraud".Mr Ganley said he initiated the proceedings to "vindicate his good name".Lawyers for both sides came back before the High Court this afternoon to say they had resolved their difficulties. A statement from Village Magazine read out in court said that while they strongly upheld "their right to engage in vigorous investigation and comment on matters of public interest", they "accepted that it would have been preferable to have interviewed Mr Ganley before publishing serious allegations about him".The magazine has agreed to publish a wide ranging interview with the Libertas founder in their next edition.

==

Sooo.... Declan Ganley went to all the trouble of hiring a legal team, filing papers, going to court and making a Big Stink, all to get a chance to get an interview in The Village. That's one expensive article, though I am sure it will boost sales for his new friends in The Village. I wonder what kind of oil he will be selling in the article? I wonder why he backed down and settled so easily? I mean, how embarrassing does it get? He did more damage to himself than anyone else did by facilitating the Irish Times to basically reprint the guts of the entire article from some little pseudo-lefty rag, that nobody really takes seriously, and would never have read. And the Times even got to quote Ganley making all the allegations, against himself, in effect.

Another bungling by our fearless Leader to be.

Anyway, did anyone hear him on Pat Kenny this morning?

Yeh, I heard him. He's certainly a good speaker but I found he tended to ramble on a bit, wouldn't let Pat ask questions.

I read the Village last week, I wouldn't consider it a 'leftie-rag' tho. More of an eclectic inflamatory pamphlet for ABC1s.

Anticoalition wrote:

Sooo.... Declan Ganley went to all the trouble of hiring a legal team, filing papers, going to court and making a Big Stink, all to get a chance to get an interview in The Village. That's one expensive article, though I am sure it will boost sales for his new friends in The Village. I wonder what kind of oil he will be selling in the article? I wonder why he backed down and settled so easily? I mean, how embarrassing does it get? He did more damage to himself than anyone else did by facilitating the Irish Times to basically reprint the guts of the entire article from some little pseudo-lefty rag, that nobody really takes seriously, and would never have read. And the Times even got to quote Ganley making all the allegations, against himself, in effect.

Another bungling by our fearless Leader to be.

Anyway, did anyone hear him on Pat Kenny this morning?

He didn't back down. The Village printed a rubbish article, and now he has secured a right to reply. There would be no point seeking damaged from The Village because they don't have a red cent to rub together. Is there nothing about Ganley or Libertas that you won't attempt to smother in a pathetic attempt to spin in bad light. You lot are getting very boring at this stage.

Frank Connolly's contribs were good.

Justine McCarthy's piece on legal eagles 'chilling' free-speech was a puff piece with anecdotes.

I thought it a wierd coincidence that this morning Ms McCarthy did her interview with Pat directly after Declan Ganley's.
It was like one minute you have a powerful businessman speaking about defending his name in the press and the next a hack bemoaning such businessmen being able to silence the press through threat of litigation. There's a kind of symmetry there somewhere.

snapple drinker wrote:

Frank Connolly's contribs were good.

Justine McCarthy's piece on legal eagles 'chilling' free-speech was a puff piece with anecdotes.

I thought it a wierd coincidence that this morning Ms McCarthy did her interview with Pat directly after Declan Ganley's.
It was like one minute you have a powerful businessman speaking about defending his name in the press and the next a hack bemoaning such businessmen being able to silence the press through threat of litigation. There's a kind of symmetry there somewhere.

I said "pseudo lefty-rag", because it had taken a big swing from the days of its founding, in an effort to get advertising, and ended up alienating its core audience.

The only symmetry I see is Declan Ganley getting his comeuppance, rather than his few tuppence. After all the bluster all Ganley got is a right of reply, so he can AGAIN deny that his is a liar, fraud, snakeoilsalesman, etc. I am sure they would have been happy to give to him an interview, without all this bother, but Ganley wouldn't have even answered their calls if they did try to interview him last week. This week, they get an exclusive, and about 100,000 euros of free publicity.

Declan did back down, and in fact ran with his tails between his legs. Ganley wanted the magazines off the shelves, because money damages weren't sufficient. He achieved that, in his peculiarly Ganley way, by ensuring that every issue is now going to sell off the shelves. Duh oh. They should give him the 10,000 reward for his spectacular own goal.

Monday morning will live in infamy in Abbeyknockmoy, Tuam, as the day Ganely wrote his own political obituary, and all the chickens came home. One story in the Irish Times tells how the BCC, cleared RTE, and rubbishes all the crap we have been hearing from Ganley, Cookie, Corcoran, and the rest of the holy soldiers about the Prime Time show. Prime Time didn't come close to saying the things Village said, so maybe he should have settled that case while he was at it, and given them another swing at it as well. An added bonus is that Politics.ie got their first real lesson in editorial freedom, legal logic, and the true meaning of "Beltway shyte", as Corcoran called it.

Another story in the Irish Times on Monday has Ganley saying he is NOT a liar, snakeoil salesman, fraud, etc...

And another Monday Times article chronicled all the Libertas euro-rats jumping ship, and highlights once more the fact that nothing about Libertas adds up.

Oh, and of course the final article about Holy Declan is sure to broaden his appeal in Opus Dei circles.

I'm sure they won't be dancing at the crossroads in Abbeyknockmoy tonight.

He didn't prove that they were wrong. He backed down. He settled. He is finished.

Anticoalition wrote:

snapple drinker wrote:

Frank Connolly's contribs were good.

Justine McCarthy's piece on legal eagles 'chilling' free-speech was a puff piece with anecdotes.

I thought it a wierd coincidence that this morning Ms McCarthy did her interview with Pat directly after Declan Ganley's.
It was like one minute you have a powerful businessman speaking about defending his name in the press and the next a hack bemoaning such businessmen being able to silence the press through threat of litigation. There's a kind of symmetry there somewhere.

I said "pseudo lefty-rag", because it had taken a big swing from the days of its founding, in an effort to get advertising, and ended up alienating its core audience.

The only symmetry I see is Declan Ganley getting his comeuppance, rather than his few tuppence. After all the bluster all Ganley got is a right of reply, so he can AGAIN deny that his is a liar, fraud, snakeoilsalesman, etc. I am sure they would have been happy to give to him an interview, without all this bother, but Ganley wouldn't have even answered their calls if they did try to interview him last week. This week, they get an exclusive, and about 100,000 euros of free publicity.

You're sure? How sure are you? Is that why they didn't ask? Nonsense.

Quote :

Declan did back down, and in fact ran with his tails between his legs. Ganley wanted the magazines off the shelves, because money damages weren't sufficient. He achieved that, in his peculiarly Ganley way, by ensuring that every issue is now going to sell off the shelves. Duh oh. They should give him the 10,000 reward for his spectacular own goal.

He is getting a right to reply, it's more valuable than any compensation he could hope to get from Village. And yes, there was increased publicity as a result of this which will, no doubt, boost the sales of the next edition which will feature an interview with Ganley. Own goal? I think not.

Quote :

Monday morning will live in infamy in Tuam as the day Ganely wrote his own political obituary, and all the chickens came home. One story in the Irish Times tells how the BCC, cleared RTE, and rubbishes all the crap we have been hearing from Ganley, Cookie, Corcoran, and the rest of the holy soldiers about the Prime Time show.

The BCC decision on Prime Time was hardly "rubbished" anything. It was weak and repetitious.

Quote :

Prime Time didn't come close to saying the things Village said, so maybe he should have settled that case while he was at it, and given them another swing at it as well. An added bonus is that Politics.ie got their first real lesson in editorial freedom, legal logic, and the true meaning of "Beltway shyte", as Corcoran called it.

It's Cochrane, not Corcoran. I know you don't do accuracy but at least try and get the names right. And it's no wonder prime time didn't come close to saything the nonsense village did, Kevin barrington's nonsense was a step too far for anybody.

Another story in the Irish Times on Monday has Ganley saying he is NOT a liar, snakeoil salesman, fraud, etc...
Because he isn't.

Quote :

And another article chronicles all the Libertas euro-rats jumping ship, and highlights once more the fact that nothing about Libertas adds up.

Nature debate, name calling. Nice. I'm not jumping ship.

Quote :

Oh, and of course the final article about Holy Declan is sure to broaden his appeal in Opus Dei circles.

I'm sure they won't be dancing at the crossroads in Tuam tonight.

He didn't prove that they were wrong. He backed down. He settled. He is finished.

Whinge, whinge, whinge. Just because you say it and convince youself it's true doesn't make it so.

(scene in Court 7 today)

Ganley wanted the magazine pulled, because he said they published false statements. He went to court for that purpose. Then, he ran, in the middle of the hearing. Did he not ask for a right of reply BEFORE going to court? Why did he back down? Obvious he didn't have a leg to stand on.

Can we rename this thread, 'The Abbeyknockmoy Wonder Boy Joins the Village People'?

In layman's terms, what are ye talking about? What's BCC?

Ganley was spoken about in less than glowing terms
He protests and gets a court case
The court tells him he can have an interview - right of reply.

Am I following it so far ??