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

toxic avenger wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

Should we send along a referee and some heavies?

Seriously, I hope the fuzz have spotted this potential conflict between Albania and Sesame Street. The word "tinderbox" springs to mind:).

There will be security there.

You mean securocrats...

* Runs for cover *

Those too. And protocrats and securofascists and all sorts of wonderful things. But mostly I'll be standing beside the security with a spraycan of Lithium to hand.

Its the phil the security are not going to entertain you . TA may not be able to attend but I will try.

Cool stuff everyone can make bumper stickers


and badges

Hanging around students would be bad enough, hanging around self important Trinners students would be worse than AIDS...

toxic avenger wrote:

Hanging around students would be bad enough, hanging around self important Trinners students would be worse than AIDS...

and having to listen to Caroline Simons would add to that propelling one into the seventh circle of Dante's Hell

Quote :

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0210/1233867929741.html
CARL O'BRIENTHE
FOUNDER of Libertas Declan Ganley is seeking a High Court order forcing
Village Magazine to withdraw all copies of its latest edition which
contains an article that is critical of him. The application
seeks to force the magazine’s publishers to withdraw the magazine
containing an article entitled, “Declan Ganley, snakeoil salesman”, and
to remove the same article from its website. In an ex parte
affidavit filed at the High Court yesterday, Mr Ganley said the article
has made “very serious allegations concerning my business dealings in
Iraq”. Mr Ganley said the article makes out that he is “dishonest, a
liar, a fraud and that I am responsible for the deaths of thousands of
police officers and soldiers through corruption”. The assertions and
allegations are without foundation and are a deliberate attempt at
character assassination, he added. Legal counsel for Mr Ganley
yesterday brought the application before Mr Justice Peter Charlton in
the High Court and a hearing is due to take place in the High Court
tomorrow. The affidavit said: “Specifically, the article states that I
‘covertly’ inserted a clause into a government contract and states that
‘the whole debacle led to a two-year delay in the police network at a
very critical time’. “The defendant refers to a separate
publication and quotes, ‘during that time thousands of American
soldiers and Iraqi police officers were killed, at least some of whom
could have been saved if they were able to pick up a phone and call for
help’.” His affidavit said he has instructed his solicitor to
institute proceedings to “vindicate my good name” and added that
damages will not adequately compensate him for “loss and damages”. The
affidavit said Mr Ganley became aware of the article last Friday and
returned to the country for the purpose of swearing an affidavit in
support of his application.

I'll post most of what was in my first post on this thread again, re Village magazine. I'm surprised at their lack of judgment...

Quote :

There is a great exclusive from Frank Connolly
in it about the architect/developer Paul Clinton, and his involvement
with the Carlton Cinema site in O'Connell Street. Apparently, he has
come forward to tell of a 'well-connected political figure' who
introduced him to Frank Dunlop and the 'system' (when he says his
troubles began), and also tried to get him to sell on his tax
incentives for the site. The abuse of the tax designation system is
apparently widespread. He tells of how the proposed tax designations
for Dublin were available to developers long before they became public,
allowing the developers to make a killing by buying up the land before
the announcement. This echoes the same allegation made about Bertie
Ahern in the mid-90s, that files were taken away for developers to look
at, Emmett Stagg made a complaint, Reynolds told ahern to put the files
back. Clinton also tells of a senior public official who told him that
it was essential to pay off senior political figures and officials,
that it was the 'golden rule' of Dublin's property scene, and tells how
that same official intervened directly with his bankers to try and
screw his plans when he refused to pay the bribes. I get the feeling
that some of the figures involved were until recently very senior
political figures indeed, or close friends anyway. Clinton also tells
of being basically held captive in a car in an alley and pressured to
sell on his tax incentives for the site, which he refused to do.

It's a great exclusive for Connolly, and might cause some trouble for some
very prominent people. It's this type of journalism that Village should
encourage. But their editorial policy since the takeover has been of
varying judgment. You get articles like this, but on the previous pages
you have Kevin Barrington's obsessive Ganley witch-hunt. It's hard to
know where the new editorial team, under Michael Smith, want to go with
the magazine, but I hope it's better than what I read there.

RTE CLEARED OVER PRIMETIME ON GANLEY PEOPLE KORPS HAS SOME COMMENTS
This vindicates several posters who were derided for stating RTE did a good job on Primetime Ganley show.

Quote :

Libertas employees
and a general Declan Ganley info blog


Monday, February 9, 2009

RTE cleared of bias in damning Ganley Primetime special


After months of complaints about being asked uncomfortable questions
about his past an Irish statutory body had stated clearly that “In
entering such a political arena, Mr Ganley could expect his business
past and political aspirations to be held up to scrutiny. It is common
practice in democratic societies to scrutinise and question political
people in such a manner.” "The funding of Libertas has been, and
continues to be, widely debated and discussed in political, media and
public forums, the BCC said."

The
report by the THE BROADCASTING Complaints Commission also vindicated
RTE stating: “Mr Ganley represented himself on the programme and was
afforded ample opportunity to refute allegations and to express
opinion. The commission was of the opinion that the subject matter was
treated fairly and was fair to all interests concerned. There was no
evidence of editorial bias in this broadcast.”

Declan Ganley threatened to sue RTE over it's Primetime Special which examined his interests in Russia, Albania, Latvia, Bulgaria, South America and the USA.

See the show here

The
commission's report also stated that such interrogation of Declan
Ganely's past was to be expected: “Mr Ganley has become a part of the
Irish and European political scene and therefore, he can expect his
past to be scrutinised and questions to be asked about his support,
both financial and personal,”

Ganley also alleged that the Irish Times and it's reporter Colm Keena had "a known left-wing bias, as increasingly does RTÉ"

On
the same day as he tries to silence another magazine Ganley is being
clearly told by a statutory body that he can expect to be investigated.
RTE said "“This was a careful piece of investigative journalism carried
out in the public interest.”


Broadcasting watchdog clears RTÉ Ganley profile

toxic avenger wrote:

I'll post most of what was in my first post on this thread again, re Village magazine. I'm surprised at their lack of judgment...

Maybe Michael Smith wants to have it out with Ganley in court ?

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

I'll post most of what was in my first post on this thread again, re Village magazine. I'm surprised at their lack of judgment...

Maybe Michael Smith wants to have it out with Ganley in court ?

Perhaps, but he might want to remember that the onus is on him to prove kevbar's claims true. I'm not sure it's a wicket I'd like to be defending...

Two months ago I saw posters state he was going to ream RTE too. Today BCC report is pretty hard on Ganley and opens up the gates of real investigation! RTE stands vindicated and I am sure part 2 will be a lot more interesting!!!

Peopla Korps has the full reports onLibertas Nein Danke


Complaint made by: Mr. Donie Murphy Ref. No. 457/08

Station:	Programme:	Date:
RTÉ One	Prime Time

Complaint made by: Mr. Rory Fitzgerald Ref. No. 437/08

Station:	Programme:	Date:
RTÉ One	Prime Time	27 November 2008

Complaint Summary:

This highly rated book by Christian T. Miller covers the events referred to in Kevin Barrington's article.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0316166278/ref=sib_dp_pop_sup/181-3431406-2635721?ie=UTF8&p=random#reader-link

Quote :

Blood Money: Wasted Billions, Lost Lives, and Corporate Greed in Iraq
by T. Christian Miller (Author)
Key Phrases: special inspector general, private security contractors, logistics contract, United States, Army Corps, Custer Battles (more...)

19 Reviews

Declan Ganley I believe complained to the author about the book but he did not take any legal action and it is still readily available.

Declan Ganley has sought an order of the High Court to have all copies of Village Magazine removed from shops. As the issue is now before the courts it would be unwise to comment much on the matter... but I can't see him being successful given that the courts are loathed to granting this particular order save in the gravest of circumstances.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0210/1233867929741.html


The Broadcasting Complaints Commission (BCC) has rejected complaints regarding a Prime Time programme about Declan Ganley. The complaint was not made by Declan Ganley. The BCC said that there was no evidence of editorial bias and Mr Ganley was given a fair right of reply and ample opportunity to answer questions that were of public interest during the broadcast.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0210/1233867929743.html

johnfás wrote:

Declan Ganley has sought an order of the High Court to have all copies of Village Magazine removed from shops. As the issue is now before the courts it would be unwise to comment much on the matter...

Surely that is the strategy of Mr Ganley, like it was with RTE; to deter discussion and debate of the issues that are the subject of the action. Making issues sub judice has the effect of stifling public debate, just at a time when it is critical to the public that such debate occurs. It is vital that the bullyboy tactics don't work, and that we do indeed have a vibrant EU democracy.

It is quite possibly the tactic, but it doesn't change the fact that matters before the court are sub judice and thus should not be commented on. The judiciary are quite capable of making an order prohibiting a party from accessing the courts without the prior consent of the High Court if they feel that the system is being abused.

I guess this is the sort of application decided on one way or the other quite quickly - would that be right johnfás?

What are the matters that should not be discussed until then? The content of the article?

Yes, you can get through those sort of applications in a day - they're the kind of orders people run into court and seek when time is of the essence - you would seek similar orders for blood transfusions against certain religious groups when they are dying etc. I presume he is seeking a mandatory injunction. That is a temporary measure which the courts will order in anticipation of a future case being heard in order to maintain the status quo between potential parties. For instance, if Mr Ganley thinks that something in the magazine is defamatory he will seek a mandatory injunction requiring all copies of the magazine to be removed from sale in order to protect his name pending a future trial on the matter. He must demonstrate that there is a reasonable case to be answered by the opposing party and it is likely that he would have to undertake to compensate for any damages to the magazine resulting from the loss of revenue if he were to be unsuccessful at trial. As I said before, the history of the courts in regard to injunctions against publication is that they are loathed to grant such injunctions except in particularly clear cut cases - there is a high standard to be proved.

It would be unwise of us to comment on the article and whether or not it would fulfil any of the criteria I outlined above as in the first instance it will be a matter for the judge to decide whether a reasonable case has to be answered and there after it would be a matter for the jury at a future trial.

Right, please will everyone respect that. There will be a decision on it soon enough.

the rte judgement is significant

Anticoalition wrote:

johnfás wrote:

Declan Ganley has sought an order of the High Court to have all copies of Village Magazine removed from shops. As the issue is now before the courts it would be unwise to comment much on the matter...

Surely that is the strategy of Mr Ganley, like it was with RTE; to deter discussion and debate of the issues that are the subject of the action. Making issues sub judice has the effect of stifling public debate, just at a time when it is critical to the public that such debate occurs. It is vital that the bullyboy tactics don't work, and that we do indeed have a vibrant EU democracy.

For goodness sake! It could simply be that the man has genuinely been libelled and is seeking appropriate redress. The Ganley hatred on here is beyond all logic and proportion. HIs actions are entirely consistent with those of a person who believes himself to be the subject of a campaign of villification. If I were in his shoes and had his money, I'd do exactly the same.

Mod - part of content removed. Please see above.

Aside from it being a pitifully stupid way for a senior politician to express himself, the criticisms coming from Dick Roche are a bit rich both as one of Fianna Fails thugs-in-chief and being personally responsible for destroying so much of our environment - in breach of the EU law which he purports to want us all to uphold and increase:

http://www.tarawatch.org/irish-independent-letter-to-the-editor-dick-roche-lisbon-and-the-m3

(BTW - I had not seen the moderator warning in firey red above before posting this message.)

Today's Irish Times published this story, Ganley seeks order against 'Village Magazine'

I am going to reprint it again in full here, because in my opinion, anything in The Irish Times is fair game for discussion, as they are not being sued and the information is in the public doman:

Quote :

CARL O'BRIEN

THE FOUNDER of Libertas Declan Ganley is seeking a High Court order forcing Village Magazine to withdraw all copies of its latest edition which contains an article that is critical of him. The application seeks to force the magazine’s publishers to withdraw the magazine containing an article entitled, “Declan Ganley, snakeoil salesman”, and to remove the same article from its website. In an ex parte affidavit filed at the High Court yesterday, Mr Ganley said the article has made “very serious allegations concerning my business dealings in Iraq”. Mr Ganley said the article makes out that he is “dishonest, a liar, a fraud and that I am responsible for the deaths of thousands of police officers and soldiers through corruption”.

The assertions and allegations are without foundation and are a deliberate attempt at character assassination, he added. Legal counsel for Mr Ganley yesterday brought the application before Mr Justice Peter Charlton in the High Court and a hearing is due to take place in the High Court tomorrow. The affidavit said: “Specifically, the article states that I ‘covertly’ inserted a clause into a government contract and states that ‘the whole debacle led to a two-year delay in the police network at a very critical time’.

“The defendant refers to a separate publication and quotes, ‘during that time thousands of American soldiers and Iraqi police officers were killed, at least some of whom could have been saved if they were able to pick up a phone and call for help’.” His affidavit said he has instructed his solicitor to institute proceedings to “vindicate my good name” and added that damages will not adequately compensate him for “loss and damages”. The affidavit said Mr Ganley became aware of the article last Friday and returned to the country for the purpose of swearing an affidavit in support of his application.

Today's Irish Times is more like the Ganley Edition, with four stories. This opinion piece is interesting:
Contradictions in Libertas stance may prove its undoing

EUROPEAN DIARY: The fiasco of Libertas’s funding application has been a bad start to its election campaign, writes JAMIE SMYTH

HAVE THE wheels fallen off Declan Ganley’s European adventure? This is the question people in Brussels are asking after last week’s fiasco when Libertas initially won formal status as an European political party from the European Parliament only to see the decision rescinded a few hours later when serious questions began to be raised about the legitimacy of its political backers. Under an EU regulation that entered force in 2004, Libertas needs seven signatures from national or European politicians from different EU states to win recognition and access to EU funds to help it campaign in June’s European elections. Ganley has scoured Europe over the past three months seeking willing recruits for Libertas, which he hopes can claim up to 30 MEP seats in the parliament by campaigning on an anti-Lisbon Treaty ticket. At last week’s Strasbourg plenary it seemed the businessman turned political campaigner had the seven political names in the bag. A bureau of senior MEPs in the parliament ruled on Monday that Libertas should be granted formal status and €200,000 funding to help it campaign in the elections.

Nine other European political parties – most attached to existing political groups in the parliament such as the Liberals or Socialists – were also recognised, receiving in total almost €10 million in EU funds. But by Tuesday morning the Liberal group were asking questions about one of the names on the Libertas list of backers. Igor Grazin, a member of the Estonian parliament, is from the Estonian Reform Party, which is already linked to the Liberals’ European party. When they questioned Grazin about his signature, he denied he had ever signed Libertas’s application and quickly sent a signed affidavit to the parliament authorities to that effect.

“Mr Ganley appears to have fallen at the first hurdle. Apparently his claim to have recruited enough supporters was untrue. What Europe really needs is a bit more veritas and a lot less Libertas,” said British Liberal MEP Andrew Duff, who jubilantly announced the Libertas hiccup to the European media. Libertas retorted with a strong statement alleging a conspiracy against them
perpetrated by pro-European forces. It also published photographs showing the signature of Grazin on the documents supporting their application to become a European party, and thereby eligible for EU taxpayers’ cash. “It might be a coincidence or a conscious effort to intimidate those who expressly support the advancement of democracy. . . We deplore the corrupt, dishonest and anti-democratic forces that are pushing them to renounce their support,” said Libertas, which added that it could provide new signatures.

Yet within hours of this statement arriving in reporters’ e-mails, a second Libertas backer was denying that he ever signed its application. Bulgarian MEP Mincho Kuminev, told The Irish Times he hadn’t signed any document and was not supporting Ganley’s Libertas or any other “foreign party”. To lose one political backer may be deemed unlucky but to lose two in 24 hours seems careless, noted senior MEPs in Strasbourg, who ordered an investigation by the parliament’s bureau. Parliamentary officials will
now contact all seven names on the list to try to “verify the situation” before official status or any EU funding is released to
Ganley’s organisation. There is no doubt that the episode has damaged Libertas, which looks as if it is having difficulty signing up
and maintaining supporters in the myriad of countries it is trying to campaign in. But it has also damaged the parliament, which initially waved through €200,000 worth of EU funds without checking the bona fides of each signatory.

Several MEPs on the bureau, including Northern Ireland’s Jim Nicholson, asked for a temporary delay to allow further checks on the application but their concerns were dismissed. This raises questions over the management of the European party funding
scheme, worth some €15 million of taxpayers’ money in 2009. What perhaps is more surprising is why Libertas even bothered to apply to the parliament for official sanction as a political party. The €200,000 the group may be granted is small potatoes when compared to the €75 million Ganley says he needs to mount a successful EU-wide campaign. Libertas doesn’t need the EU status to run candidates in member states, as it can rely on national registration. Official status would also impose rules on fundraising, although given the lack of checks on its application it is doubtful that these would ever be properly enforced. Yet by applying to become a recognised European political party, Libertas has had to rush to cobble together a rag-tag band of political
supporters that could end up scaring potential moderate voters away. The handful of Libertas supporters named in the media so far include a colourful array of Eurosceptic, anti-immigration and Catholic fundamentalists such as French MEP Philippe de Villiers, Finnish MP Timo Soini and Polish assemblyman Cyprian Gutkowski. Yet despite this Ganley continues to preach his love for the EU, even warning delegates attending a religious conference held in Ireland at the weekend that one should “never become a Eurosceptic”. Ultimately it may be this glaring inconsistency rather than its bid for EU funding that causes the wheels to come off Libertas in the June elections.

Infatuation, clarification, closure by NeuEurope has some good commentary today too:

...A party intent on being in the European Parliament with the results of the next EU elections in June and working from within to change all the way through to a not so secular Euro (my interpretation) is the Libertas party. Who dishearteningly I learnt was about to get EU funding but then at the last moment the parliament did not pass this after all due to a hiccup with a signature. Grand! They released this statement:

The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) is resigned to the prospect of Declan Ganley’s “Libertas“ movement receiving a share of EU taxpayer’s money to fight the European elections following this evening’s decision by the European Parliament to allocate the new party Euro200,000.

“We live in a pan-European democracy,” said Graham Watson, ALDE group leader. “All creeds and colours should be tolerated as long as they comply with the rules laid down on party funding.” “The market for euro-sceptic voices is becoming increasingly competitive, but the presence of Libertas may well raise public interest in the European elections and force pro-Europeans to be bolder and better organised in their presentation and defence of the EU and its latest Treaty reform.”

Andrew Duff (UK, Lib Dem), ALDE constitutional affairs spokesperson remarked:

“I note the establishment of Libertas as a European political party with great interest. Its founders appear all to be quixotic figures on the fringes of politics...... the more the merrier. “Mr Ganley will find that registration as a political party obliges him to be scrupulous and transparent in his financial affairs. He may also learn more about the democratic character of the European Union.

“The emergence of Libertas makes the anti-European terrain even more congested than it already is. I hope they don’t all choke each other to death.”

Libertas continues, the UK’s separation anxiety and lack of connection to the EU continues and yet they are in it. It’s almost as
torturous a relationship as that of someone having two homes. More exploration is needed (maybe closure was a bit preemptive for a title).

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