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

Of course you can't apply the entirity of business concepts to the political process, particularly notions of ownership.

I am interested to hear Cookie's opinion on whether he will continue to support Ganley's leadership of the movement if Ganley fails to gain election. I certainly don't think those Libertas members who do achieve election to the European Parliament will accept leadership from Ganley if he fails to achieve a mandate himself. They would smell blood and stick the knife in. What would that do to an organisation which is established in the manner of a company, namely a company limited by shares.

I would welcome Cookie's opinions on this matter but he doesn't seem too keen to give them. I would have thought the supporters of most political parties would agree that if their leader did not gain election serious questions would be asked of their continued leadership of the organisation.

I don't want to be stirring this any more than it is at present. But something has been bothering me for a while.

If the followers do not know what the policies are going to be, until they're released into to public domain later this month, who is writing the policies? More importantly what process is being used to achieve agreement on them?

McGuirk and Roche on Newstalk, see here

cookiemonster wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Libertas are in Shut down the only place Cookie is commenting is on Libertas Nein Danke the blogger people Korps has posted the following which is of interest in itself
People Korps said...

Quote :

A User from the libertas employee David Cochrane's Politics.ie who works for Libertas, Cookiemonster, has been trying to sell Libertas snake oil through the comment section here. His comments will no longer be published as he has a whole website politics.ie to play with. I recommend you view his comments on irelands best political forum Machine Nation
Machine Nation March 5, 2009 2:27 AM

So the blogger "peoplekorps" has not only on a previous occasion revealed the location on contributors to his site, speculated that they are Libertas employees but now he's also speculating on the actual identity of contributors to his site. Thats's very nice of him.

And now he's also censoring debate, that's very open of him. What sort of coward is he that he won't allow his lies and smear stand up to public scrutiny? Pretty pathetic behaviour from a pretty pathetic individual.

he is linking to here so peopl,e can read your comments , thats fair. Did you and Cochrane ban him from politics.ie? Is that censorship? maybe there were abusive comments left or something.

[MOD] Unsubstantiated allegation about another person and website removed [MOD]


Were you posting on his blog?

Is John McGuirk still involved with Libertas?

johnfás wrote:

Is John McGuirk still involved with Libertas?

yes he is
he was their spokeperson today

Hermes wrote:

I don't want to be stirring this any more than it is at present. But something has been bothering me for a while.

If the followers do not know what the policies are going to be, until they're released into to public domain later this month, who is writing the policies? More importantly what process is being used to achieve agreement on them?

Declan Ganley, in a recent interview I linked here, said that Libertas's thinking was very close to his own.

Their Swedish representative was until recently a eurosceptic opposed to the EMU. I wonder what persuaded him to change his politics.

perhaps politics & policies are a movable feast for Libertas and its EU proxies.
It all seems very suspect to me.
Are we to assume that similiar budgets (to that of the Swedes) are made available to all Libertas' EU signatories?
If it were that would indicate an enormous fund that Libertas has at its disposal.

The 'truth' about Libertas just gets murkier and murkier. What is interesting is how many people now have come forward with allegations of improper behaviour by Libertas: MEPs who insist their names and signatures were used to attempt to register it against their permission, people like Klaus becoming more and more critical of Ganley's methods, claims that Libertas acted improperly in various places, and now a claim that they effectively tried to bribe a Eurosceptic party in Sweden into joining it. The usual Libertas spin before was how there was some plot in Brussels against them. The trouble is that the people making allegations in country after country are Eurosceptics who are about as far as it is possible to be from possible 'Brussels stooges'. Some of them are former associates of Libertas. Meanwhile in Ireland politicians who question Libertas's motivation are slapped with injunctions and threatened with legal cases.

I disagree fundamentally with the likes of PANA, Kathy Sinnott, Joe Higgins etc. But I can respect them. It is hard to have any respect for Libertas. If there was one allegation, one could give Libertas the benefit of the doubt. One would be more sceptical if there was two or three. But at this stage there is a virtual avalanche of people, all Eurosceptics, alleging improper behaviour by Libertas. What is alleged in Sweden, and which the Eurosceptic party say is provable and independently witnessed, stinks to high heaven. Trying allegedly to bribe another party is quite shocking.

It is muddy, no doubt.

Papal_knight Two wrote:

The 'truth' about Libertas just gets murkier and murkier. What is interesting is how many people now have come forward with allegations of improper behaviour by Libertas: MEPs who insist their names and signatures were used to attempt to register it against their permission, people like Klaus becoming more and more critical of Ganley's methods, claims that Libertas acted improperly in various places, and now a claim that they effectively tried to bribe a Eurosceptic party in Sweden into joining it. The usual Libertas spin before was how there was some plot in Brussels against them. The trouble is that the people making allegations in country after country are Eurosceptics who are about as far as it is possible to be from possible 'Brussels stooges'. Some of them are former associates of Libertas. Meanwhile in Ireland politicians who question Libertas's motivation are slapped with injunctions and threatened with legal cases.

I disagree fundamentally with the likes of PANA, Kathy Sinnott, Joe Higgins etc. But I can respect them. It is hard to have any respect for Libertas. If there was one allegation, one could give Libertas the benefit of the doubt. One would be more sceptical if there was two or three. But at this stage there is a virtual avalanche of people, all Eurosceptics, alleging improper behaviour by Libertas. What is alleged in Sweden, and which the Eurosceptic party say is provable and independently witnessed, stinks to high heaven. Trying allegedly to bribe another party is quite shocking.

If it's true... You seem to have decided already, and I'm sure that has nothing to do with which side of the Lisbon fence you're on...

Let's look at the two main pro-Lisbon parties. Fianna Fail, well where do I start? The corruption? The incompetence? The complete callousness and cronyism? And Fine Gael. A party that managed to sink even lower by blackmailing a woman, infected with hepatitis C by the state, into signing a 'no fault' settlement even on her death bed. When Libertas match these two triumphs of democracy, then I'll take the bleating a bit more seriously. Until then, as a non-supporter who doesn't like being manipulated by smear-merchants, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt...

toxic avenger wrote:

Papal_knight Two wrote:

The 'truth' about Libertas just gets murkier and murkier. What is interesting is how many people now have come forward with allegations of improper behaviour by Libertas: MEPs who insist their names and signatures were used to attempt to register it against their permission, people like Klaus becoming more and more critical of Ganley's methods, claims that Libertas acted improperly in various places, and now a claim that they effectively tried to bribe a Eurosceptic party in Sweden into joining it. The usual Libertas spin before was how there was some plot in Brussels against them. The trouble is that the people making allegations in country after country are Eurosceptics who are about as far as it is possible to be from possible 'Brussels stooges'. Some of them are former associates of Libertas. Meanwhile in Ireland politicians who question Libertas's motivation are slapped with injunctions and threatened with legal cases.

I disagree fundamentally with the likes of PANA, Kathy Sinnott, Joe Higgins etc. But I can respect them. It is hard to have any respect for Libertas. If there was one allegation, one could give Libertas the benefit of the doubt. One would be more sceptical if there was two or three. But at this stage there is a virtual avalanche of people, all Eurosceptics, alleging improper behaviour by Libertas. What is alleged in Sweden, and which the Eurosceptic party say is provable and independently witnessed, stinks to high heaven. Trying allegedly to bribe another party is quite shocking.

If it's true... You seem to have decided already, and I'm sure that has nothing to do with which side of the Lisbon fence you're on...

Let's look at the two main pro-Lisbon parties. Fianna Fail, well where do I start? The corruption? The incompetence? The complete callousness and cronyism? And Fine Gael. A party that managed to sink even lower by blackmailing a woman, infected with hepatitis C by the state, into signing a 'no fault' settlement even on her death bed. When Libertas match these two triumphs of democracy, then I'll take the bleating a bit more seriously. Until then, as a non-supporter who doesn't like being manipulated by smear-merchants, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt...

In my case, it definitely does not have anything to do with being pro-Lisbon. In the last year, I've gone from being anti-Lisbon to anti-EU. Libertas potentially threatens to spilt the Eurosceptic vote right across Europe, and is seen as treacherous by the Eurosceptic parties, so I would leave a margin of doubt, just possibly, that all of these people from the Czech Republic and Sweden and elsewhere are lying. Its getting harder to believe that by the day. I don't see any doubt that Libertas chose a clutch of extreme right wing allies, some with criminal or violent records, to represent it in its application for EU funding.

There is plenty of cynicism and corruption in other parties, but I fail to see where you are taking them on, except in Libertas threads.

toxic avenger wrote:

Papal_knight Two wrote:

The 'truth' about Libertas just gets murkier and murkier. What is interesting is how many people now have come forward with allegations of improper behaviour by Libertas: MEPs who insist their names and signatures were used to attempt to register it against their permission, people like Klaus becoming more and more critical of Ganley's methods, claims that Libertas acted improperly in various places, and now a claim that they effectively tried to bribe a Eurosceptic party in Sweden into joining it. The usual Libertas spin before was how there was some plot in Brussels against them. The trouble is that the people making allegations in country after country are Eurosceptics who are about as far as it is possible to be from possible 'Brussels stooges'. Some of them are former associates of Libertas. Meanwhile in Ireland politicians who question Libertas's motivation are slapped with injunctions and threatened with legal cases.

I disagree fundamentally with the likes of PANA, Kathy Sinnott, Joe Higgins etc. But I can respect them. It is hard to have any respect for Libertas. If there was one allegation, one could give Libertas the benefit of the doubt. One would be more sceptical if there was two or three. But at this stage there is a virtual avalanche of people, all Eurosceptics, alleging improper behaviour by Libertas. What is alleged in Sweden, and which the Eurosceptic party say is provable and independently witnessed, stinks to high heaven. Trying allegedly to bribe another party is quite shocking.

If it's true... You seem to have decided already, and I'm sure that has nothing to do with which side of the Lisbon fence you're on...

Let's look at the two main pro-Lisbon parties. Fianna Fail, well where do I start? The corruption? The incompetence? The complete callousness and cronyism? And Fine Gael. A party that managed to sink even lower by blackmailing a woman, infected with hepatitis C by the state, into signing a 'no fault' settlement even on her death bed. When Libertas match these two triumphs of democracy, then I'll take the bleating a bit more seriously. Until then, as a non-supporter who doesn't like being manipulated by smear-merchants, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt...

There are several politians who should have been imprisoned and there are sevreal who are plain stupid. However toxic your take on Libertas is plan ridiculas.

There will eventually be calls for serious investigation of them and as it stand I would favour a full criminal investigation of theis bribery attempt in Sweden and the attempt to scam the Eu for 200,000 . i would also like to see one or two of them behind bars for the obvious breaches during the Libertas No campaign.

i would also speculate that their activities at present and their spending will be the cause of serious repersussions even for any in the organisation who may be blameless.


seriously I agree with PK ....its time for direct action to stop Libertas and their allies.
#
toxic its not that your comments irritate me, they are an offence to all on the left.

cactus flower wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Papal_knight Two wrote:

The 'truth' about Libertas just gets murkier and murkier. What is interesting is how many people now have come forward with allegations of improper behaviour by Libertas: MEPs who insist their names and signatures were used to attempt to register it against their permission, people like Klaus becoming more and more critical of Ganley's methods, claims that Libertas acted improperly in various places, and now a claim that they effectively tried to bribe a Eurosceptic party in Sweden into joining it. The usual Libertas spin before was how there was some plot in Brussels against them. The trouble is that the people making allegations in country after country are Eurosceptics who are about as far as it is possible to be from possible 'Brussels stooges'. Some of them are former associates of Libertas. Meanwhile in Ireland politicians who question Libertas's motivation are slapped with injunctions and threatened with legal cases.

I disagree fundamentally with the likes of PANA, Kathy Sinnott, Joe Higgins etc. But I can respect them. It is hard to have any respect for Libertas. If there was one allegation, one could give Libertas the benefit of the doubt. One would be more sceptical if there was two or three. But at this stage there is a virtual avalanche of people, all Eurosceptics, alleging improper behaviour by Libertas. What is alleged in Sweden, and which the Eurosceptic party say is provable and independently witnessed, stinks to high heaven. Trying allegedly to bribe another party is quite shocking.

If it's true... You seem to have decided already, and I'm sure that has nothing to do with which side of the Lisbon fence you're on...

Let's look at the two main pro-Lisbon parties. Fianna Fail, well where do I start? The corruption? The incompetence? The complete callousness and cronyism? And Fine Gael. A party that managed to sink even lower by blackmailing a woman, infected with hepatitis C by the state, into signing a 'no fault' settlement even on her death bed. When Libertas match these two triumphs of democracy, then I'll take the bleating a bit more seriously. Until then, as a non-supporter who doesn't like being manipulated by smear-merchants, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt...

In my case, it definitely does not have anything to do with being pro-Lisbon. In the last year, I've gone from being anti-Lisbon to anti-EU. Libertas potentially threatens to spilt the Eurosceptic vote right across Europe, and is seen as treacherous by the Eurosceptic parties, so I would leave a margin of doubt, just possibly, that all of these people from the Czech Republic and Sweden and elsewhere are lying. Its getting harder to believe that by the day. I don't see any doubt that Libertas chose a clutch of extreme right wing allies, some with criminal or violent records, to represent it in its application for EU funding.

There is plenty of cynicism and corruption in other parties, but I fail to see where you are taking them on, except in Libertas threads.

Er... I don't know where to start. My record on posting on the corruption in Fianna Fail is probably not beaten by anyone else, at least over on the other site. I don't want to go into it, but my personal record is probably second to none. As to Fine Gael, Brigid McCole's daughter is a good friend of my cousin, I know the case inside out, and have banged on about it at length over yonder, including just this morning. I fail to see how you fail to see that, in fact I'm amazed.

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Papal_knight Two wrote:

The 'truth' about Libertas just gets murkier and murkier. What is interesting is how many people now have come forward with allegations of improper behaviour by Libertas: MEPs who insist their names and signatures were used to attempt to register it against their permission, people like Klaus becoming more and more critical of Ganley's methods, claims that Libertas acted improperly in various places, and now a claim that they effectively tried to bribe a Eurosceptic party in Sweden into joining it. The usual Libertas spin before was how there was some plot in Brussels against them. The trouble is that the people making allegations in country after country are Eurosceptics who are about as far as it is possible to be from possible 'Brussels stooges'. Some of them are former associates of Libertas. Meanwhile in Ireland politicians who question Libertas's motivation are slapped with injunctions and threatened with legal cases.

I disagree fundamentally with the likes of PANA, Kathy Sinnott, Joe Higgins etc. But I can respect them. It is hard to have any respect for Libertas. If there was one allegation, one could give Libertas the benefit of the doubt. One would be more sceptical if there was two or three. But at this stage there is a virtual avalanche of people, all Eurosceptics, alleging improper behaviour by Libertas. What is alleged in Sweden, and which the Eurosceptic party say is provable and independently witnessed, stinks to high heaven. Trying allegedly to bribe another party is quite shocking.

If it's true... You seem to have decided already, and I'm sure that has nothing to do with which side of the Lisbon fence you're on...

Let's look at the two main pro-Lisbon parties. Fianna Fail, well where do I start? The corruption? The incompetence? The complete callousness and cronyism? And Fine Gael. A party that managed to sink even lower by blackmailing a woman, infected with hepatitis C by the state, into signing a 'no fault' settlement even on her death bed. When Libertas match these two triumphs of democracy, then I'll take the bleating a bit more seriously. Until then, as a non-supporter who doesn't like being manipulated by smear-merchants, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt...

There are several politians who should have been imprisoned and there are sevreal who are plain stupid. However toxic your take on Libertas is plan ridiculas.

There will eventually be calls for serious investigation of them and as it stand I would favour a full criminal investigation of theis bribery attempt in Sweden and the attempt to scam the Eu for 200,000 . i would also like to see one or two of them behind bars for the obvious breaches during the Libertas No campaign.

i would also speculate that their activities at present and their spending will be the cause of serious repersussions even for any in the organisation who may be blameless.


seriously I agree with PK ....its time for direct action to stop Libertas and their allies.
#
toxic its not that your comments irritate me, they are an offence to all on the left.

Direct action? You mean violence? I'll not comment further if you do.

And like I've said ad nauseam, give me actual cast-iron proof of corruption or wrong-doing, I'll oppose them to the end. Until then, I'm not joining in the smear job, it's aimed at sinking the whole 'no' campaign, not just Libertas, and I won't be a party to it.

Probably because I don't go to the other site bar the odd occasion, so I am only going on what I see here

So, do you say that Fianna Fail shouldn't be criticised, because Fine Gael is bad too ?

Why is Libertas the only party that should not be touched?

Be amazed that someone who claims to have done so much re FF can avoid the deep relationship between ganley and its most corrupte characters.
For F### 's sake man, he actually had to admit a 30 K payment to liam lawlor, ie he had to admit waht could not be denied, you howeevr accept ther Ganley version told AFTER Lawlor was convieniently deceased.
and YOU think that ganley was scammed by Lawlor.



having watched libertas unravel you still think that ganley and lawlor were not two peas in a pod?
I am going to have a nice cup of tea . i can not recommend anything polite for you to do so I refrain from comment on you further

Also Toxic how come a lefty like you assumes that direct action should or would involve violence. Tory cabinet miinisters like Tebbit might have thought that but a lefty. i dispair

cactus flower wrote:

Probably because I don't go to the other site bar the odd occasion, so I am only going on what I see here

So, do you say that Fianna Fail shouldn't be criticised, because Fine Gael is bad too ?

Why is Libertas the only party that should not be touched?

exactly and cast the net wider to the PDs and Labour and the Greens and see what can be unearthed . BUT NONE OF IT COULD TOUCH LIBERTAS FOR SHEER SCALE OR LEVEL OF CYNICism and indeed none are as dangerous to us .

Lisbon yes or no I could care less,

Libertas out of the game and under criminal investigation is all I care about for the moment.

cactus flower wrote:

Probably because I don't go to the other site bar the odd occasion, so I am only going on what I see here

So, do you say that Fianna Fail shouldn't be criticised, because Fine Gael is bad too ?

Why is Libertas the only party that should not be touched?

I am actually wondering why I'm replying, but here goes. When or where did I say either of those things? Why are my words twisted so? I present an argument and you reply as if on the basis that I said something else altogether. I have attacked Fianna Fail incessantly, and Fine Gael intermittently, and everyone knows it, I doubt you don't know it too. If there are legitimate criticisms of Libertas (and I have made them myself - including their hubris in taking on all of Europe - a project that I don't believe has any chance of succeeding) then let them be made. If it's all vague innuendo and people frothing at the mouth over every factoid of obscure origin, then I'm not joining in. If there's hard proof of wrongdoing, I'll be at the forefront attacking them. But if there was any hard proof, or even strong evidence, we'd know it already, and we don't. If you are really a no voter and are happy to play along with a smear job orchestrated by the yes side designed to sink the whole no campaign, not just Libertas, then be my guest, but I won't be joining you.

toxic wrote

Quote :

nd like I've said ad nauseam, give me actual cast-iron proof of corruption or wrong-doing, I'll oppose them to the end. Until then, I'm not joining in the smear job, it's aimed at sinking the whole 'no' campaign, not just Libertas, and I won't be a party to it.

Did you wait until you had cast-iron proof of FF's corrupt dealings ?

Is there anything about Libertas, politically, that you disagree with ?

cactus flower wrote:

toxic wrote

Quote :

nd like I've said ad nauseam, give me actual cast-iron proof of corruption or wrong-doing, I'll oppose them to the end. Until then, I'm not joining in the smear job, it's aimed at sinking the whole 'no' campaign, not just Libertas, and I won't be a party to it.

Did you wait until you had cast-iron proof of FF's corrupt dealings ?

Ah Ha!!!! Get out of that one you soft southerner.

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Be amazed that someone who claims to have done so much re FF can avoid the deep relationship between ganley and its most corrupte characters.
For F### 's sake man, he actually had to admit a 30 K payment to liam lawlor, ie he had to admit waht could not be denied, you howeevr accept ther Ganley version told AFTER Lawlor was convieniently deceased.
and YOU think that ganley was scammed by Lawlor.



having watched libertas unravel you still think that ganley and lawlor were not two peas in a pod?
I am going to have a nice cup of tea . i can not recommend anything polite for you to do so I refrain from comment on you further

Also Toxic how come a lefty like you assumes that direct action should or would involve violence. Tory cabinet miinisters like Tebbit might have thought that but a lefty. i dispair

Direct action in this context would point at violence as a possibility, that's why I asked you to clarify, I didn't make an assumption. I'm glad to hear it, by the way.

As to Lawlor, I've made no comment on it at all except on the issue of the falsified invoice, an issue which is beyond doubt (Lawlor had previous form, and the invoice was clearly altered - different serial number etc to that normally issued by Ganley) and on the circumstances of Lawlor first meeting Ganley (identical to the circumstances described by Tom Gilmartin in his evidence - Lawlor gatecrashing uninvited and trying to convince everyone of his indispensability.). On the actual transactions agrred between Lawlor and Ganley I have not commented because I don't know what went on, but I certainly don't believe it reflects well on Ganley's judgment that he was hokked by Lawlor in this way. That's not the same as evidence of corruption, and I don't see where Lawlor could have exercised corrupt influence where the dealings in question were outside the state. So despair away, I'll keep my counsel all the same until I'm presented with something approaching solid evidence either way...

cactus flower wrote:

toxic wrote

Quote :

nd like I've said ad nauseam, give me actual cast-iron proof of corruption or wrong-doing, I'll oppose them to the end. Until then, I'm not joining in the smear job, it's aimed at sinking the whole 'no' campaign, not just Libertas, and I won't be a party to it.

Did you wait until you had cast-iron proof of FF's corrupt dealings ?

Is there anything about Libertas, politically, that you disagree with ?

Yes.

Yes, as I've told you on numerous occasions, I don't agree with their federalism, their enthusiasm for the integrationist EU, nor what I perceive (rightly or wrongly, as Ganley's pro-business/anti-worker agenda. Perhaps I should just keep these replies stored somewhere for quick copy-and-pasting...

crossed posts.