Gilmartin V Bertie whos lying?

Villain

Tom Gilmartin has said he met Bertie Ahern in October of 1987, this contradicts the evidence that Bertie gave to the tribunal!

So whos telling the truth?

Gilmartin told the tribunal yesterday that on February 1, 1989, he was brought to the Dail by Liam Lawlor, then a Fianna Fail TD, because "the boss wants to see you". He met Gerry Collins, Seamus Brennan, Brian Lenihan, Albert Reynolds, Padraig Flynn, Ray Burke - and Mr Ahern.


Yesterdays evidence from Irish Independent Todays evidence from RTE

Very interesting reading, I just thought I'd post a thread to see what people think, FF isn't comming out of this looking good!

Interested to hear Cork's opinion. Bertie was able to make comments about Gerry Adams which couldn't be proven but most people here believed him, do they believe that he didn't meet Tom Gilmartin??

LFCFan

you should change the thread name. It asks who is telling the truth but the poll asks who is lying. I voted for Gilmartin because I wanted to say he was telling the truth but now it looks like I voted in favour of Bertie and I'm sick.

Bertie will be exposed for the corrupt, lying, cheating gob****e that he is long after he is leader in yet another pointless Tribunal in 20 years time. How he is still leader is beyond me.

Villain

Originally posted by LFCFan
you should change the thread name. It asks who is telling the truth but the poll asks who is lying. I voted for Gilmartin because I wanted to say he was telling the truth but now it looks like I voted in favour of Bertie and I'm sick.

Bertie will be exposed for the corrupt, lying, cheating gob****e that he is long after he is leader in yet another pointless Tribunal in 20 years time. How he is still leader is beyond me.

Sorry I've chnaged the thread title, was in the middle of writing and got dragged away, maybe a mod can adjust the poll for your vote and change my spelling, I really need to get a dictionary.

bonkey

I've amended your vote...trusting that you're telling the truth about it.

I would like to say this though...it is entirely possible for two people to believe contradictory things without either of them having to be a liar. One, or both, could simply be mistaken.

jc

Villain

Originally posted by bonkey
I would like to say this though...it is entirely possible for two people to believe contradictory things without either of them having to be a liar. One, or both, could simply be mistaken.

jc

Mistaken twice?? I think thats a little unlikely!

dahamsta

Originally posted by bonkey
I've amended your vote...trusting that you're telling the truth about it.

Bonkey For eVoting Attendant!

Sparks

Hmmm. So do we believe a proven liar or a proven briber?

Villain

From RTE:
John Gallagher SC said Mr Ahern claims to have met Mr Gilmartin first in October 1988, first in his constituency office and then in his department office. Mr Gilmartin replied 'I can't account for Bertie Ahern's memory or lack of it.'

mike65

I'm inclined to belive neither is being entirely honest.

Mike.

Sparks

Seems it's not just Bertie who's going to be saying "I have no clear memory of that..."

From RTE:

The property developer, Tom Gilmartin, has told the Mahon Tribinal that the former TD Liam Lawlor attempted to blackmail an English investment company who were trying to develop a shopping centre at Bachelors Walk in Dublin.

Mr Gilmartin said Mr Lawlor told Arlington executives he had been appointed by the Irish Government to take care of the project and that having him on board was the difference between it succeeding or not.

The developer claims Mr Lawlor asked for £100,000 and a 20% stake in the project on the Government's behalf.

LFCFan

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Bertie minister for finance back when Haughy was fleecing the country? Surely there has to be some investigation in Bertie's dealings back then?

Sparks

Originally posted by LFCFan
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Bertie minister for finance back when Haughy was fleecing the country? Surely there has to be some investigation in Bertie's dealings back then?

Welcome to Ireland
But then, I suppose he could defend himself from more serious charges by saying he had lied on his resume and was unqualified for the job....

Cork

It must be great to view everything from the moral high ground.

I have spruced my work experience at interview. So what??


A LOG of visitors to Leinster House shows no record of the disputed ministerial meeting attended by a builder who claims he was pursued for bribes.
The logbook, obtained by the planning corruption tribunal, shows no record of Tom Gilmartin visiting Leinster House in February 1989, when he says he attended a meeting with Bertie Ahern, the taoiseach, and other ministers.

How can anybody sit in judgemant on Gilmartin or Bertie? Gilmartin has not even completed his evidence.

Avoid the tabloid hysteria and contrieved moral outrage.

I wonder who was the mystery man?

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
It must be great to view everything from the moral high ground.

Face it, having higher moral ground than Fianna Fail is sortof like having a better diet than Idi Amin.
It's not that difficult.

I have spruced my work experience at interview. So what??

Well, apart from the minor technicality that it's fraud, there's the scale - you put your work experience in the best possible light, whereas bertie lied about getting his primary degree and about getting a postgraduate degree from one of the most prestigious institutions in the field. That's not "padding" or "putting the best spin on" something, that's just straight out-and-out lying.

A LOG of visitors to Leinster House shows no record of the disputed ministerial meeting attended by a builder who claims he was pursued for bribes.

Odd, that politicians aiming to extort money from businesses illegally wouldn't keep a careful paper record of their movements and accounts, isn't it?

Cork

Originally posted by Sparks



Odd, that politicians aiming to extort money from businesses illegally wouldn't keep a careful paper record of their movements and accounts, isn't it?

But the log book was kept & it showed no record of Tom Gilmartin visiting Leinster House in February 1989.

Wait untill, the full evidence is heard before rushing to judgement.

Tribunerals are better than "star chambers" or cheap fodder for the tabloid red tops.

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
But the log book was kept & it showed no record of Tom Gilmartin visiting Leinster House in February 1989.

You're not seriously going to say that his not signing a book is proof he wasn't there, are you?

Cork

Originally posted by Sparks
You're not seriously going to say that his not signing a book is proof he wasn't there, are you?

Well - If he did sign it - it would proove that he was.

I really don't know - if the guy was there or not.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
It must be great to view everything from the moral high ground.

Yes, its the same as what we do when we try to create and enforce just laws....or do you think that our legal system should be more firmly based in an "arra sure, what does it matter if he's lying, because don't we all do that once in a while" basis???

I have spruced my work experience at interview. So what??

So...as your employer, I would be entitled to fire you for having obtained employment under false pretences. Thats what.

Avoid the tabloid hysteria and contrieved moral outrage.

Let me go back and re-read that first line of your post again....

It must be great to view everything from the moral high ground.

...hmmmm.....not quite sure I'm getting this....one more time.......

It must be great to view everything from the moral high ground.

Nope...I'm lost. I can't figure it out.
Whats that you were saying about avoiding "contrived moral outrage" ???????

jc

Villain

Originally posted by Cork
It must be great to view everything from the moral high ground.

LOL,

Cork man if you haven't got anything senisble to say your better off saying nothing.

Bertie is no saint, FF are no saints I can accept that, why can't you?

RainyDay

Mary O'Rourke (FF Leader in the Senate) remembers the meeting quite clearly, funnily enough.

Victor

Originally posted by Cork
I wonder who was the mystery man?

I can reveal it was

Dustin the Turkey

, he needed the money for his presidential campaign.

Villain

FF councillor demanded £100,000!!FF councillor demanded £100,000!!

FF the good old corrupt party ha!

sceptre

Mr Gilmartin said Mr Hanrahan said he needed the money because the development was going to harm the 'little people' in Lucan who had taken care of him over the years.

He was taking bribes from leprechauns as well? Short property developers? Running a white-collar protection racket?

Originally posted by Cork
It must be great to view everything from the moral high ground.

Actually it's anything but great when I consider all the honest people who voted for these thieves who were prepared to ignore the needs of their electorate as long as they got their own tainted cup of potage.

I'm a pretty honest bloke by regular standards. I've been in positions of trust, some elected (college things, nothing too exciting) and I've never taken a bribe or driven roughshod or otherwise over the people I was representing just because I could make a few quid for myself on the side. Here we're looking at elected politicians who not only took money, breaching the trust placed in them by their electorate, but took money from property developers so they could probably ignore the needs of their electorate again by letting developers get their own way. They're twice culpable. Plus they've put us in a situation where we have to spend our tax money again in finding out who these crooks are and what they've done so that every politician and property developer isn't automatically assumed to be the kind of person who takes bribes of gives bribes. Three times culpable. Honest people who pay their taxes in return for a vote every few years as well as shoddy services as a result of our money being stolen resent that. Why wouldn't they?

dictatorcat

it's hard to believe Gilmartin (don't worry i voted that bertie was lieing) when he comes out and claims death threats against him, but then we all know how corrupt FF are, and lets not forget that they have the same origins as the shinners! Can someone explain how a man with no quilifications can lead one of the best educated societies in Europe? Maybe it's easier for interested parties to keep a corrupt ignorant man in power than a moral intelligent one?

www.rte.ie/news/2004/0310/mahon.html

Villain

Did anyone else hear the reconstruction of Fridays tribunal on radio 1 last night??

Mr McMahon council for the Taoiseach (as well as others) kept harping on about Bertie not being at the said meeting on 1st or 2nd of Febuary 1989.

Mary O'Rourke says otherwise!, I was interested in what Gilmartin was saying about why Bertie is so adament that he wasn't there, as he said "it was a nothing meeting, nothing really happened, it was just a chit chat"

In other words why is Bertie bothering to lie??

They also spoke on the program about the fact that Gilmartin told Bertie about the £50,000 given to P Flynn, Bertie said as he was treasurer at the time he wouldn't have thought it to unusual!!! (in an interview on the same program in 2002)

The party treasurer didn't normally collect money do! and £50,000 15 years ago was a hell of a lot of money.

Bertie is lieing and badly at that, and that fecker is Leader of this country, he's lying to the tribunal he claims to have set-up!!!

A disgrace a bloody disgrace!

Villain

Listened to more of this last night on the way home, Gilmartin reckons he could have brought 1 billion investment into this country if it wasn't for the government of the day.

His evidence is excellent, which is not quite what I would call Berties council's cross examination, he tied to bring up a case from the 70's in Cavan which Gilamrtin was involved in beacuse the Judge of the day (Mr Sheedy no less) called him shifty!.

The tribunal rules him out of order and said such statement was inproper and not allowed by the Tribunal.

Gilmartin insisted on replying however, and gave a very good account of himself that left the gallery in applause and Berties council looking a little stupid!!

Cork

Just to say "Happy St. Patricks Day" to all.

Tom Gilmartin. I really have not made up my mind of Tom yet. So I'll keep this one short. I'd be a lot happier if he had kept the Isle of Man bank account number & if he could identify the mystery man.

Three men claiming to be members of the IRA also visited him at his home in Luton; they demanded money but he refused to co-operate

link

Did people think the man was made of money?

Villain

He also claims "Bertie asked me would I consider making a donation to the Party(FF)"

He went on to say that there was a alot more evidence to come and that it would get interesting for the current Taoiseach and other ministers.

He pointed out that they were many many good men among those Politicans who were corrupt, he spoke specially about Mary O'Rourkes brother and nephews say he held them in teh highest regard. He also said there was many councillors who were honest decent people who had no involvement in the corruption.

Xterminator

It seems now that Bertie has an alibi, Gilmartin says he might have been mistake about what day the meeting took place.
(Source last nights herad (17th march)).

Never does your credibility good to have to change your story midstream ..eh?

X

Villain

Originally posted by Xterminator
It seems now that Bertie has an alibi, Gilmartin says he might have been mistake about what day the meeting took place.
(Source last nights herad (17th march)).

Never does your credibility good to have to change your story midstream ..eh?

X

Actually he says it is his belief that it took place on the 1st of febuary, but it could have been the 2nd or 3rd.

Berties council questioned Gilmartin about why the meeting was recorded in his note book on the 1st, Gilmartin replied by saying that it was only a note book not a diary he didn't always write entrys in on the right date.

I think the Hearld simplified the evidence too much if you heard the cross examination who would understand that he never said for definite that it took place on the 1st.

It was a long time ago so it would be easy to be a day or 2 out, I mean most of the ministers that are involved always say "I have no recolection", it will be interetsing to see what date Mary O' Rourke says it took place.

Villain

Well Mary O'Rourke gave her evidence yesterday and well aprt from the date, she agrees with almost everything Gilmartin said.

She is very sure the meeting took place and that Bertie and others were there.

Our Toiseach is lying????

Fuc king disgrace, fair play to Mary O'Rourke, shows there is some decent politicians out there.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1158917&issue_id=10686