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

Wherever he goes, Ganley surrounds himself with military. My original guesstimate of him as a Chalabi type would-be "saviour of freedom" is not so far disrupted by any of this.

I see he said "He still opposes the Lisbon Treaty". This is very watery stuff. He supported Nice after all FA. The EU is far too ripe and promising a set up to ignore. It is precisely through the EU structures that he is trying to build his pan-European party. What is Eurosceptic about that? The Eurosceptics increasingly loathe him in England.

cactus flower wrote:

My original guesstimate of him as a Chalabi type XXXXX is not so far disrupted by any of this.

You've likened him and Libertas to Hitler, Stalin, Franco and now Ahmed Chalabi. Who is next, Ceausescu? Saparmurat Niyazov? Kim Jong-il? You're getting pretty weird about this at this stage.

cookiemonster wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

My original guesstimate of him as a Chalabi type XXXXX is not so far disrupted by any of this.

You've likened him and Libertas to Hitler, Stalin, Franco and now Ahmed Chalabi. Who is next, Ceausescu? Saparmurat Niyazov? Kim Jong-il? You're getting pretty weird about this at this stage.

This is just distraction from the reality that he has allied himself to groups who regularly give the Nazi salute. Point of fact, I have not likened him to Hitler or Stalin - singularly inappropriate given their attitude to religion.

Francoism is part of the strain of the European Right Wing Catholicism now adhered to by Libertas. If Libertas allies itself with left wing or centrist Spanish parties, and Ganley disassociates himself fully from the extreme right in Poland, I would have to think again about that comparison.

Chalabi was a man with big political ambitions who relied on military connections (in his case US) to achieve them.

I have heard other people compare Ganley with Mosley.

cactus flower wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

My original guesstimate of him as a Chalabi type XXXXX is not so far disrupted by any of this.

You've likened him and Libertas to Hitler, Stalin, Franco and now Ahmed Chalabi. Who is next, Ceausescu? Saparmurat Niyazov? Kim Jong-il? You're getting pretty weird about this at this stage.

This is just distraction from the reality that he has allied himself to groups who regularly give the Nazi salute. Point of fact, I have not likened him to Hitler or Stalin - singularly inappropriate given their attitude to religion.

Yes, you have, you have made verious references to the Hitler-Stalin pact.

Quote :

Francoism is part of the strain of the European Right Wing Catholicism now adhered to by Libertas.

Ganley is a ardent catholic, but Libertas is not. There are many involved who don't hold the same beliefs that Ganley does. I am one of them.

Quote :

If Libertas allies itself with left wing or centrist Spanish parties, and Ganley disassociates himself fully from the extreme right in Poland, I would have to think again about that comparison.

How very considerate of you.

Quote :

Chalabi was a man with big political ambitions who relied on military connections (in his case US) to achieve them.

And Ganley is a man who has hired 1 former military man. Hardly like with like now is it.

Quote :

I have heard other people compare Ganley with Mosley.

I have heard people compare Ganley with Satan, doesn't make it true.

Cookiemonster said

Quote :

Yes, you have, you have made verious references to the Hitler-Stalin pact

I mentioned the Hitler-Stalin pact as general historic illustration of how the left, in compromising with and making tactical alliances with the far right, leave themselves open to and should expect a good shafting.

Quote :

And Ganley is a man who has hired 1 former military man. Hardly like with like now is it.

Are you suggesting that Ganley has no relationship with the US military?

Mosley and Ganley share a number of characteristics. Satan does not exist.

With the exception of the UK Europol candidate, all of Libertas's new branches are peopled with people from parties of far right Catholic persuation (COIR being the nearest comparison here). Ganley himself in his public statements as a representative of Libertas has repeatedly emphasised his "non-relativist" religious beliefs are relevant to his politics. If you don't share these beliefs, are you sure you are in the right party?

cookiemonster wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

My original guesstimate of him as a Chalabi type XXXXX is not so far disrupted by any of this.

You've likened him and Libertas to Hitler, Stalin, Franco and now Ahmed Chalabi. Who is next, Ceausescu? Saparmurat Niyazov? Kim Jong-il? You're getting pretty weird about this at this stage.

Good point Cookie except for last line "You're getting pretty weird about this at this stage" ........the only weird thing is Ganley's military and militaristic obsession

Set back for Ganley and Klaus and their Czech plans today as the Czech lower house passed Lisbon treaty by more than 2 to 1.Irish Government statement

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Set back for Ganley and Klaus and their Czech plans today as the Czech lower house passed Lisbon treaty by more than 2 to 1.Irish Government statement

May I ask, are you pro-Lisbon? Do you think Lisbon would be good for the EU and Ireland?

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Set back for Ganley and Klaus and their Czech plans today as the Czech lower house passed Lisbon treaty by more than 2 to 1.Irish Government statement

May I ask, are you pro-Lisbon? Do you think Lisbon would be good for the EU and Ireland?

I am. I believe we'll be better equipped to weather the economic storm anchored within the safe haven of Europe. By the same token if we were to rejected it a second time, I feel we would cast ourselves adrift, and I don't fancy Ireland ending up like Iceland.
sorry for cutting in

snapple drinker wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Set back for Ganley and Klaus and their Czech plans today as the Czech lower house passed Lisbon treaty by more than 2 to 1.Irish Government statement

May I ask, are you pro-Lisbon? Do you think Lisbon would be good for the EU and Ireland?

I am. I believe we'll be better equipped to weather the economic storm anchored within the safe haven of Europe. By the same token if we were to rejected it a second time, I feel we would cast ourselves adrift, and I don't fancy Ireland ending up like Iceland.
sorry for cutting in

No, that's fine. I disagree, but you're far from alone thinking that way.

toxic avenger wrote:

snapple drinker wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Set back for Ganley and Klaus and their Czech plans today as the Czech lower house passed Lisbon treaty by more than 2 to 1.Irish Government statement

May I ask, are you pro-Lisbon? Do you think Lisbon would be good for the EU and Ireland?

I am. I believe we'll be better equipped to weather the economic storm anchored within the safe haven of Europe. By the same token if we were to rejected it a second time, I feel we would cast ourselves adrift, and I don't fancy Ireland ending up like Iceland.
sorry for cutting in

No, that's fine. I disagree, but you're far from alone thinking that way.

of course disagree, that's democracy. Why don't you support the treaty?

I am in favour of the EU.I could do without aspects of Lisbon, but they are less problematic than a lot of individual countries domestic laws like the UK Terror legislation,mandatory sentencing in Ireland, etc.

At this stage I would prefer a strong Europe that was not crippled by Euroscepticism. We are 90% there as it stands.the benefits of a stronger Europe currently outway the negatives for me.

I had Polish taxi driver today who brought up the anti EU movement in Poland. he mention Ganley's popularity there. I asked him dis he think that the young people of Poland would like to work abroad. he said he thought a lot would, he then agreed that Poland would stay with the EU.


that siad I distrust the rise of neo con far right Ganley crew more than I am concerned with Lisbon

snapple drinker wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

snapple drinker wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Set back for Ganley and Klaus and their Czech plans today as the Czech lower house passed Lisbon treaty by more than 2 to 1.Irish Government statement

May I ask, are you pro-Lisbon? Do you think Lisbon would be good for the EU and Ireland?

I am. I believe we'll be better equipped to weather the economic storm anchored within the safe haven of Europe. By the same token if we were to rejected it a second time, I feel we would cast ourselves adrift, and I don't fancy Ireland ending up like Iceland.
sorry for cutting in

No, that's fine. I disagree, but you're far from alone thinking that way.

of course disagree, that's democracy. Why don't you support the treaty?

It represents a consolidation of, and partial advancement of, moves towards European integration. I'm a localist. I prefer sovereignty being vested in the people to the greatest extent possible, and this represents a consolidation of moves in the opposite direction. I oppose 'one size fits all' straightjackets also. My opposition isn't so much to any individual proposal (though I do oppose some of them, e.g. the creation of a European 'foreign minister') so much as to what it represents, a further move towards either a centralised or a federal super-state (my money is on centralised). I would oppose it even if it were transparent, democratic, and accountable (which, i my view, it is inherently incapable of being). It is an ideologically-driven idealist (in the International Relatons theory sense) folly, and I am a Realist and a localist.

Frightened Albanian wrote:

I am in favour of the EU.I could do without aspects of Lisbon, but they are less problematic than a lot of individual countries domestic laws like the UK Terror legislation,mandatory sentencing in Ireland, etc.

At this stage I would prefer a strong Europe that was not crippled by Euroscepticism. We are 90% there as it stands.the benefits of a stronger Europe currently outway the negatives for me.

I had Polish taxi driver today who brought up the anti EU movement in Poland. he mention Ganley's popularity there. I asked him dis he think that the young people of Poland would like to work abroad. he said he thought a lot would, he then agreed that Poland would stay with the EU.


that siad I distrust the rise of neo con far right Ganley crew more than I am concerned with Lisbon

Would you still oppose Ganley if he came out in favour of a 'yes' vote this time around?

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

I am in favour of the EU.I could do without aspects of Lisbon, but they are less problematic than a lot of individual countries domestic laws like the UK Terror legislation,mandatory sentencing in Ireland, etc.

At this stage I would prefer a strong Europe that was not crippled by Euroscepticism. We are 90% there as it stands.the benefits of a stronger Europe currently outway the negatives for me.

I had Polish taxi driver today who brought up the anti EU movement in Poland. he mention Ganley's popularity there. I asked him dis he think that the young people of Poland would like to work abroad. he said he thought a lot would, he then agreed that Poland would stay with the EU.


that siad I distrust the rise of neo con far right Ganley crew more than I am concerned with Lisbon

Would you still oppose Ganley if he came out in favour of a 'yes' vote this time around?

Yes .
he is one of the most dangerous characters to emerge in decades

I would oppose Ganley even if I wanted a Lisbon No vote

why are you so suspicious of Ganley FA? aside from the things you've mentioned here and elsewhere (funding, neo-con connections, war profiteering etc.) what single verifiable law has he broken?

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

I am in favour of the EU.I could do without aspects of Lisbon, but they are less problematic than a lot of individual countries domestic laws like the UK Terror legislation,mandatory sentencing in Ireland, etc.

At this stage I would prefer a strong Europe that was not crippled by Euroscepticism. We are 90% there as it stands.the benefits of a stronger Europe currently outway the negatives for me.

I had Polish taxi driver today who brought up the anti EU movement in Poland. he mention Ganley's popularity there. I asked him dis he think that the young people of Poland would like to work abroad. he said he thought a lot would, he then agreed that Poland would stay with the EU.


that siad I distrust the rise of neo con far right Ganley crew more than I am concerned with Lisbon

Would you still oppose Ganley if he came out in favour of a 'yes' vote this time around?

Yes .
he is one of the most dangerous characters to emerge in decades

Just wanted to clarify. There has been so much discussion of the man, and none of the issue, that I never actually thought to ask...

I don't see how a bald bloke from Watford can be taken that seriously, let alone be viewed as some kind of Dr. No. You're all weird in that way...

not weird at all read more toxic

toxic avenger wrote:

snapple drinker wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

snapple drinker wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Set back for Ganley and Klaus and their Czech plans today as the Czech lower house passed Lisbon treaty by more than 2 to 1.Irish Government statement

May I ask, are you pro-Lisbon? Do you think Lisbon would be good for the EU and Ireland?

I am. I believe we'll be better equipped to weather the economic storm anchored within the safe haven of Europe. By the same token if we were to rejected it a second time, I feel we would cast ourselves adrift, and I don't fancy Ireland ending up like Iceland.
sorry for cutting in

No, that's fine. I disagree, but you're far from alone thinking that way.

of course disagree, that's democracy. Why don't you support the treaty?

It represents a consolidation of, and partial advancement of, moves towards European integration. I'm a localist. I prefer sovereignty being vested in the people to the greatest extent possible, and this represents a consolidation of moves in the opposite direction. I oppose 'one size fits all' straightjackets also. My opposition isn't so much to any individual proposal (though I do oppose some of them, e.g. the creation of a European 'foreign minister') so much as to what it represents, a further move towards either a centralised or a federal super-state (my money is on centralised). I would oppose it even if it were transparent, democratic, and accountable (which, i my view, it is inherently incapable of being). It is an ideologically-driven idealist (in the International Relatons theory sense) folly, and I am a Realist and a localist.

Im an ideologist.
Curiously I've placed all my chips on the opposite colour.
I'm for a single EU foreign minister who will speak for all Europeans on the world stage.
When you say you would oppose it "even if it were trasparent, democratic and accountable", are you saying that you oppose it on same grounds as Libertas?

If so, what part of the Treaty will make Europe untransparent, undemocratic and unaccountable?

snapple drinker wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

snapple drinker wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

snapple drinker wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Set back for Ganley and Klaus and their Czech plans today as the Czech lower house passed Lisbon treaty by more than 2 to 1.Irish Government statement

May I ask, are you pro-Lisbon? Do you think Lisbon would be good for the EU and Ireland?

I am. I believe we'll be better equipped to weather the economic storm anchored within the safe haven of Europe. By the same token if we were to rejected it a second time, I feel we would cast ourselves adrift, and I don't fancy Ireland ending up like Iceland.
sorry for cutting in

No, that's fine. I disagree, but you're far from alone thinking that way.

of course disagree, that's democracy. Why don't you support the treaty?

It represents a consolidation of, and partial advancement of, moves towards European integration. I'm a localist. I prefer sovereignty being vested in the people to the greatest extent possible, and this represents a consolidation of moves in the opposite direction. I oppose 'one size fits all' straightjackets also. My opposition isn't so much to any individual proposal (though I do oppose some of them, e.g. the creation of a European 'foreign minister') so much as to what it represents, a further move towards either a centralised or a federal super-state (my money is on centralised). I would oppose it even if it were transparent, democratic, and accountable (which, i my view, it is inherently incapable of being). It is an ideologically-driven idealist (in the International Relatons theory sense) folly, and I am a Realist and a localist.

Im an ideologist.
Curiously I've placed all my chips on the opposite colour.
I'm for a single EU foreign minister who will speak for all Europeans on the world stage.
When you say you would oppose it "even if it were trasparent, democratic and accountable", are you saying that you oppose it on same grounds as Libertas?

If so, what part of the Treaty will make Europe untransparent, undemocratic and unaccountable?

No, Libertas are pro-EU, and want a federal and more transparent/democratic EU (which, in my view, it is inherently incapable of being), whereas I am anti-EU (though I am realistic, I accept withdrawal is nonsense now, and my hopes are limited to preventing further transfers of sovereignty), and my opposition is not predicated on the democratic credentials, or lack thereof, but rather on the very concept of the EU. If we can limit it, kind of 'what we have we hold', then that would do me. Lisbon represents consolidation of the project so far, and I oppose it as such. Libertas and I oppose Lisbon from almost diametrically opposite positions...

Here is a great 2 and half hour epic Ganley at the Hearings of the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union . Click here scroll down for link
.
About 11 min in Ganley startslosing it. He continues after his first use of the sound bites to talk atart rambling and going at it like a terrier. On one side sits an odious looking thing drooling and grinning at his masters "cleaver" riposte. On his other elbow sits a hacket faced Caroline Simons.
I presume the thing is John McGuirk of Ogre Fianna Fail fame and now ganleyhellhund
https://www.indymedia.ie/article/61936

No, Libertas are pro-EU
If they are pro-eu why have they given their name to eurosceptic parties accross europe?

Lisbon represents consolidation of the project so far, and I oppose it as such.

Do you mean you oppose Irish/EU integration per se?

snapple drinker wrote:

No, Libertas are pro-EU
If they are pro-eu why have they given their name to eurosceptic parties accross europe?

I don't think there's any ambiguity in anything I have heard from Ganley, he's pro-EU. As to their personnel, you'd have to ask them.

Quote :

Lisbon represents consolidation of the project so far, and I oppose it as such.

Do you mean you oppose Irish/EU integration per se?

Yes.

toxic avenger wrote:

snapple drinker wrote:

No, Libertas are pro-EU
If they are pro-eu why have they given their name to eurosceptic parties accross europe?

I don't think there's any ambiguity in anything I have heard from Ganley, he's pro-EU. As to their personnel, you'd have to ask them.

Quote :

Lisbon represents consolidation of the project so far, and I oppose it as such.

Do you mean you oppose Irish/EU integration per se?

Yes.

There you are knowing the financial situation both ourselves & Europe are in, the vote has been taken and it's a dead heat, you have the deciding vote, you’ve weighed everything up, which way would you go?