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

toxic avenger wrote:

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...

You personally prioritise your views on the Lisbon Treaty above these matters - other people, myself included, don't. That is not a reason to accuse them all of a smear campaign. You seem to suggest that anyone on the left criticising Ganley is faking it and is really pro Lisbon/EU. Where is your cast iron proof of that?

toxic avenger wrote:

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.

So you were aware and are aware of exactly what B ertiie was or was not up to before you almost got sued for your P.ie post. You must be the kevin Barrington of the tribunals.

Cactus hats of to your inscrutible logic

cactus flower wrote:

It appears to me that you have substantial political agreement with Libertas, Toxic, and that that is the less than unusual reason for your consistent objection to any critique of them.

I agree with them on the 'no' vote and the 'no' vote alone. The rest is your paranoia.

toxic avenger wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

It appears to me that you have substantial political agreement with Libertas, Toxic, and that that is the less than unusual reason for your consistent objection to any critique of them.

I agree with them on the 'no' vote and the 'no' vote alone. The rest is your paranoia.

there are plenty people to support who are against Lisbon who are not COIR/Libertas?right wing demagogues. pick one but don t even thin k of pretending to be a lefty while suppoting this far right dishonest schemeing group.

cactus flower wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

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...

You personally prioritise your views on the Lisbon Treaty above these matters - other people, myself included, don't. That is not a reason to accuse them all of a smear campaign. You seem to suggest that anyone on the left criticising Ganley is faking it and is really pro Lisbon/EU. Where is your cast iron proof of that?

I never once said you were knowingly smearing Ganley under a false flag. I said that I'm not going to join in what I believe is a politically-motivated smear job designed to sink the whole 'no' side. And I said that you're free to do otherwise if you so choose. You see I don't do paranoia, though you see fit to say that you think I'm in agreement politically with Libertas when my posting record here on the other site would pretty emphatically prove otherwise (and thus that I'm basically a liar).

toxic avenger wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

It appears to me that you have substantial political agreement with Libertas, Toxic, and that that is the less than unusual reason for your consistent objection to any critique of them.

I agree with them on the 'no' vote and the 'no' vote alone. The rest is your paranoia.

I deleted that post toxic a while ago, as our posts crossed and you made a clear statement of political disagreement with Libertas, which I then replied to.

Quote :

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...

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

It appears to me that you have substantial political agreement with Libertas, Toxic, and that that is the less than unusual reason for your consistent objection to any critique of them.

I agree with them on the 'no' vote and the 'no' vote alone. The rest is your paranoia.

there are plenty people to support who are against Lisbon who are not COIR/Libertas?right wing demagogues. pick one but don t even thin k of pretending to be a lefty while suppoting this far right dishonest schemeing group.

And there you go again. No matter how many times I say I don't support Libertas (just as I don't support Coir), and no matter that I was on the other site criticising Libertas for claiming things on their posters that i thought were disingenuous and untrue, or Coir for the same, you'll continue the conspiracy nutjobbery because your brain can't cope with subtlety. Now I quite frankly don't care what you think, you're someone anonymous I don't know at the other end of some electronic whizzery, but for your own sake try to learn that people are quite capable of disagreeing with your stance on someone else without supporting that someone else. I know it's hard, but if you make an effort you'll get there eventually...

Austria calling Austria Calling Looks like Ganley has lost another one
MEP Martin rules out to run for Libertas



Wiener Zeitung - ‎5 hours ago‎

Austrian inde- pendent MEP Hans-Peter Martin will not run for re-election this June on the list of the Irish anti-EU "Libertas” party. ...


link does not work as server is down on Wiener Zeitung Broadnet perhaps

Note that across Europe it is accepted that Liebrats are anti EU by the media
why do they not belive their website or do they judge them by their neferious comrades in right wing nationalist demagogues

toxic avenger wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

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...

You personally prioritise your views on the Lisbon Treaty above these matters - other people, myself included, don't. That is not a reason to accuse them all of a smear campaign. You seem to suggest that anyone on the left criticising Ganley is faking it and is really pro Lisbon/EU. Where is your cast iron proof of that?

I never once said you were knowingly smearing Ganley under a false flag. I said that I'm not going to join in what I believe is a politically-motivated smear job designed to sink the whole 'no' side. And I said that you're free to do otherwise if you so choose. You see I don't do paranoia, though you see fit to say that you think I'm in agreement politically with Libertas when my posting record here on the other site would pretty emphatically prove otherwise (and thus that I'm basically a liar).

Was it my mistake to think that was what you were suggesting here? Or was that another case of paranoia.

Quote :

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.

I can't think of anything I have posted about Libertas's politics and political alliances that you have given a specific reply to. Imo the reason you feel you can copy and paste is that you have not engaged with the substance of the posts.

cactus flower wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

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...

You personally prioritise your views on the Lisbon Treaty above these matters - other people, myself included, don't. That is not a reason to accuse them all of a smear campaign. You seem to suggest that anyone on the left criticising Ganley is faking it and is really pro Lisbon/EU. Where is your cast iron proof of that?

I never once said you were knowingly smearing Ganley under a false flag. I said that I'm not going to join in what I believe is a politically-motivated smear job designed to sink the whole 'no' side. And I said that you're free to do otherwise if you so choose. You see I don't do paranoia, though you see fit to say that you think I'm in agreement politically with Libertas when my posting record here on the other site would pretty emphatically prove otherwise (and thus that I'm basically a liar).

Was it my mistake to think that was what you were suggesting here? Or was that another case of paranoia.

Quote :

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.

I can't think of anything I have posted about Libertas's politics and political alliances that you have given a specific reply to. Imo the reason you feel you can copy and paste is that you have not engaged with the substance of the posts.

You are playing along with it, that doesn't mean your motives are the same. As to the rest, I don't care about their alliances, I'm not voting for them. I wouldn't respond if you were detailing Fianna Fail having dodgy alliances in the EP either, I don't vote for them.

You are saying that I'm playing along with the Lisbon EU smear campaign against Ganley and the same time as you concede that my motives might be different. Do you say the same about Joe Higgins, who is one of Ganley's biggest critics?

Would you say that you are playing along with Ganley's far right agenda to suit the Lisbon No campaign ?

I can attest that cactus has on this site moved towards the Yes position BECAUSE of Libertas , that is how I see it.

It is also my own position.

cactus flower wrote:

You are saying that I'm playing along with the Lisbon EU smear campaign against Ganley and the same time as you concede that my motives might be different. Do you say the same about Joe Higgins, who is one of Ganley's biggest critics?

Would you say that you are playing along with Ganley's far right agenda to suit the Lisbon No campaign ?

I'm playing along with nothing, I'm on my own. If Ganley and Libertas want to play along with me, that's their business. Higgins (I haven't read his words on it) is entitled to do as he wishes, but, if he's at the same kind of vague innuendo-mongering that I see here, I'd be disappointed to say the least (if he's concentrating on their politics, or what is perceived to be their politics, that's fine).

Frightened Albanian wrote:

I can attest that cactus has on this site moved towards the Yes position BECAUSE of Libertas , that is how I see it.

It is also my own position.

You were on the 'no' side for Nice and Lisbon 1?

Austrian pulls out


who is next can anyone run for them now without people demanding to see their price tag?

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

I can attest that cactus has on this site moved towards the Yes position BECAUSE of Libertas , that is how I see it.

It is also my own position.

You were on the 'no' side for Nice and Lisbon 1?

No to Nice but Yes to Lisbon based on Libertas being NO.

I have said over and over again I am not that interested in Lisbon, these June elections and any atttempts at national representation whether they are bought out political parties or new untried Libertas lackeys ,
that is the real danger.

Toxic, the Cookie line on this is bull. Anita kelly did make a statement but he will confirm that that was before the radio interview with where he said catagoricallt taht the 1 mil WAS NOT FOR CAMPAIGNING that was another issue.

To put this more clearlym this was not money for posters , flyers and ads dishonest or honest. It was a fee/ inducement/ or bribe offer. that is clear . Newstalk called it an alledged bribe today when Roche and McGuirk were on. As someone who hates FF how can you support a party that offers the (personal language deleted mod cf)John McGuirk up so that Dick Roche can savage him like a kitten. Poor McGuirk thought he was going to able to talk away a 1mil alledged bribe as the presenter called it...................
I think we will be hearing more about John

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

I can attest that cactus has on this site moved towards the Yes position BECAUSE of Libertas , that is how I see it.

It is also my own position.

You were on the 'no' side for Nice and Lisbon 1?

No to Nice but Yes to Lisbon based on Libertas being NO.

And if Libertas campaigned in favour of Lisbon 2? Or campaigned against the slaughter of the first born?...

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

I can attest that cactus has on this site moved towards the Yes position BECAUSE of Libertas , that is how I see it.

It is also my own position.

You were on the 'no' side for Nice and Lisbon 1?

No to Nice but Yes to Lisbon based on Libertas being NO.

And if Libertas campaigned in favour of Lisbon 2? Or campaigned against the slaughter of the first born?...

You dont get it You think a party that claims to be pro EU that has (xxxxx - unsupported statement - mod cf) the support of hard right eurosceptic parties across europe has any beLiefs?

If liebrats said they supported anything I would doubt that they believed waht they were saying. they are a cynical and sinister fraud, they are hustling. ganley is a wide boy i doubyt if he bekieves in much other than eself preservation and cash.

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

I can attest that cactus has on this site moved towards the Yes position BECAUSE of Libertas , that is how I see it.

It is also my own position.

You were on the 'no' side for Nice and Lisbon 1?

No to Nice but Yes to Lisbon based on Libertas being NO.

And if Libertas campaigned in favour of Lisbon 2? Or campaigned against the slaughter of the first born?...

You dont get it You think a party that claims to be pro EU that has bought up the support of hard right eurosceptic parties across europe has any beLiefs?

If liebrats saifdthey supported anything I would doubt that they believed waht they were saying. they are a cynical and sinister fraud, they are hustling. ganley is a wide boy i doubyt if he bekieves in much other than eself preservation and cash.

So you oppose what Libertas say they support, even though you don't believe they really support it?

Sense, much?

CF I wouldn’t pay much attention to toxic dissembler – he
hopes that his duplicity goes unnoted. Take his repeated denials that he is a
Libertas supporter: while that may be true, he’s spent more time here and on
the other site running interference for Ganley/Libertas than any other poster
save CM.

Methinks he doth protest too much.

While toxic has expended a great deal of time and energy tarring those who voice concerns about Libertas’ bona fides as paranoid scaremongering conspiracy theorists,
he does not shrink from appealing to others with like underhand means as long as it suits his eurosceptic agenda.

Here’s but a tiny sample of toxic’s hypocrisy
(tip of the iceberg).

Quote :

As predicted before Christmas, the central plank of the Government's pro-Lisbon campaign will be pure terror. The fear that people feel for their jobs, their families, and the future, in these uncertain times has presented an opportunity for the Government to exploit to the full, one that will see the fear and uncertainty preyed upon until they get their way on Lisbon. Basically, it's a hostage situation: 'Vote yes, or the country gets it...'*

Quote :

No more referendums and fake 'discussion', automatic rubber
stamps from now on for all European Treaties. And no more pretending our voice is 'valued'. It isn't. We're tolerated, that's all, so long as we do as we're
told. Fine, if that's the reality, but let's end the charade.**

Now a charlatan might bluster that such messages are merely
sarcasm (is there a lower form of wit) or vitriolic tirade – if honesty be
their thing. I would posit that the line ‘twixt scaremongering and such be a
line easily blurred - and blur it he does at every opportunity…

Quote :

we're being terrified into voting 'yes' by the Government, as evidenced by Martin and Roche's statements, I'm not trying to scare anyone, nor am I in Government (nor in the self-same Government that created the fear).***

“I’m not trying to scare anyone”, have you ever heard such guff? Toxic will speak out of whichever orifice suits his eurosceptic agenda best, down with this sort of thing!!


NB: these are corroborative permalinks to the other place, click at your own risk

*http://www.politics.ie/lisbon-treaty/47219-lisbon-fear-factor.html?s=f48d3a787443214b3cd53402efc33a8f&#post1442163
**http://www.politics.ie/lisbon-treaty/47219-lisbon-fear-factor-5.html?s=f48d3a787443214b3cd53402efc33a8f#post1461204
***http://www.politics.ie/lisbon-treaty/47219-lisbon-fear-factor-6.html?s=f48d3a787443214b3cd53402efc33a8f#post1462130

Good post sD

Note

Quote :

Sören Wibe, leader of Junilistan (The June List), claims that representatives from anti-Lisbon Treaty party Libertas offered considerable sums of money, including almost €1 million on one occasion, if his party agreed to change its name to Junilistan-Libertas.

this is not an issue of funding a campaign it was an offer of a fee for the name change and support.

I think this thread is becoming very side tracked and extremely personal.

I can see where both Cactus and Toxic are coming from, in their main arguments. And I don't reckon that either needs blackballing due to their views.

I'd have slapped the little report post icon a few times in the last few hours, but the little blighter seems to have deserted us.

Tis fair enough to be digging for dirt on Mr Ganley as he intends to launch himself into the public as a public figure. To my knowledge, neither Cactus nor Toxic have done this and thus personal criticism that focuses on personality and integrity should end. Both parties are very decent people imo. My two cents.

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

I can attest that cactus has on this site moved towards the Yes position BECAUSE of Libertas , that is how I see it.

It is also my own position.

You were on the 'no' side for Nice and Lisbon 1?

No to Nice but Yes to Lisbon based on Libertas being NO.

And if Libertas campaigned in favour of Lisbon 2? Or campaigned against the slaughter of the first born?...

You dont get it You think a party that claims to be pro EU that has bought up the support of hard right eurosceptic parties across europe has any beLiefs?

If liebrats saifdthey supported anything I would doubt that they believed waht they were saying. they are a cynical and sinister fraud, they are hustling. ganley is a wide boy i doubyt if he bekieves in much other than eself preservation and cash.

So you oppose what Libertas say they support, even though you don't believe they really support it?

Sense, much?

you just dont get it
Libertas is a scam just like the ponzi scheme

snapple drinker wrote:

CF I wouldn’t pay much attention to toxic dissembler – he
hopes that his duplicity goes unnoted. Take his repeated denials that he is a
Libertas supporter: while that may be true, he’s spent more time here and on
the other site running interference for Ganley/Libertas than any other poster
save CM.

Methinks he doth protest too much.

While toxic has expended a great deal of time and energy tarring those who voice concerns about Libertas’ bona fides as paranoid scaremongering conspiracy theorists,
he does not shrink from appealing to others with like underhand means as long as it suits his eurosceptic agenda.

Here’s but a tiny sample of toxic’s hypocrisy
(tip of the iceberg).

Quote :

As predicted before Christmas, the central plank of the Government's pro-Lisbon campaign will be pure terror. The fear that people feel for their jobs, their families, and the future, in these uncertain times has presented an opportunity for the Government to exploit to the full, one that will see the fear and uncertainty preyed upon until they get their way on Lisbon. Basically, it's a hostage situation: 'Vote yes, or the country gets it...'*

Quote :

No more referendums and fake 'discussion', automatic rubber
stamps from now on for all European Treaties. And no more pretending our voice is 'valued'. It isn't. We're tolerated, that's all, so long as we do as we're
told. Fine, if that's the reality, but let's end the charade.**

Now a charlatan might bluster that such messages are merely
sarcasm (is there a lower form of wit) or vitriolic tirade – if honesty be
their thing. I would posit that the line ‘twixt scaremongering and such be a
line easily blurred - and blur it he does at every opportunity…

Quote :

we're being terrified into voting 'yes' by the Government, as evidenced by Martin and Roche's statements, I'm not trying to scare anyone, nor am I in Government (nor in the self-same Government that created the fear).***

“I’m not trying to scare anyone”, have you ever heard such guff? Toxic will speak out of whichever orifice suits his eurosceptic agenda best, down with this sort of thing!!

I’ve had my differences with TA over a long period of time, we have argued till kingdom come over the tribunals, we have exchanged many, many posts and I can say with as much certainty as I can, he is not duplicitous, he believes absolutely as he posts.
In my opinion it is completely unfair and unjustifiable to make that charge or even assumption without cast iron proof and as far as I can see you have produced nothing like that.