Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Labour Party on Libertas/CIA CT.

Options
  • 19-09-2008 10:31pm
    #1
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭


    Joe Costello gets all Conspiracy Theory like...

    http://www.labour.ie/press/listing/122183214937816.html
    The US military has been actively recruiting in EU Members States and other European States to join NATO and enhance the US military role in Europe. They are opposed to the EU fine-tuning its Common Foreign and Security Policy which was a feature of the Lisbon Treaty.

    indymedia he press guy prolly read!


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    So, If we're now against the CIA we can expect the government to tell the CIA to p1ss off out of Shannon now.

    If we're against the US military we can expect the government to tell them to p1ss off out of Shannon too as well.

    Since UKIP have become ardent No supporters and Avril Doyle keeps going on about how we should tell the Brits to keep out of Irish affairs, can we expect Fine Gael to call for a British withdrawal from the north?

    Hypocritical cnuts.


  • Options
    #3
    utick
    Closed Accounts Posts: 562 ✭✭✭utick


    studiorat wrote: »
    The US military has been actively recruiting in EU Members States and other European States to join NATO and enhance the US military role in Europe. !

    this doesnt make much sense because dam near all of europe is already in nato


  • Options
    #4
    utick
    Closed Accounts Posts: 562 ✭✭✭utick


    dresden8 wrote: »
    So, If we're now against the CIA we can expect the government to tell the CIA to p1ss off out of Shannon now.

    If we're against the US military we can expect the government to tell them to p1ss off out of Shannon too as well.

    Since UKIP have become ardent No supporters and Avril Doyle keeps going on about how we should tell the Brits to keep out of Irish affairs, can we expect Fine Gael to call for a British withdrawal from the north?

    Hypocritical cnuts.

    yeah its kinda funny avril doyle complaining about ukip, perhaps if she was doing her job and representing the interests of the people of her country ukip wouldnt need to be so vocal


  • Options
    #5
    Breezer
    Registered Users Posts: 3,228 ✭✭✭Breezer


    utick wrote: »
    yeah its kinda funny avril doyle complaining about ukip, perhaps if she was doing her job and representing the interests of the people of her country ukip wouldnt need to be so vocal
    One could argue that she is representing the interests of the people of her country.


  • Options
    #6
    irish_bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,271 ✭✭✭irish_bob


    utick wrote: »
    yeah its kinda funny avril doyle complaining about ukip, perhaps if she was doing her job and representing the interests of the people of her country ukip wouldnt need to be so vocal

    ukip dont give a crap about irish people , avril doyle by exposing there motives does


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    irish_bob wrote: »
    ukip dont give a crap about irish people , avril doyle by exposing there motives does


    But they respect the result of the vote, the same way the Irish government does.


  • Options
    #8
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Since UKIP have become ardent No supporters and Avril Doyle keeps going on about how we should tell the Brits to keep out of Irish affairs, can we expect Fine Gael to call for a British withdrawal from the north?

    Ignoring the obvious problems with that post, You do realise you're basing that on UKIP?

    How do you think UKIP would reply, Those defenders of our independence!

    There must be a fancy word for what you've done there!

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #9
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,762 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    dresden8 wrote: »
    But they respect the result of the vote, the same way the Irish government does.

    Only because it went their way. Would they be so vocally supportive if the result was a Yes?


  • Options
    #10
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    lab wrote:
    The US military has been actively recruiting in EU Members States and other European States to join NATO and enhance the US military role in Europe. They are opposed to the EU fine-tuning its Common Foreign and Security Policy which was a feature of the Lisbon Treaty


    why wouldn't they?

    via indymedia
    New EU treaty worries US intel services
    http://www.janes.com/news/publicsafety/jid/jid080117_1_n.shtml

    but anyway the us/cia doesn't need to pay anyway to do they bidding when said person wants to suck their dick for free


  • Options
    #11
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Only because it went their way. Would they be so vocally supportive if the result was a Yes?


    Of course not.

    The fallacy that is being propagated here is that no voters were swayed by Libertas and their evil CIA masters. UKIP are in the mix because politics makes strange bedfellows.

    One would imagine that Libertas/CIA/US Military threads should be thrown out of the politics thread into the conspiracy theory forum, but are not of course because they support the "yes" point of view.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Of course not.

    The fallacy that is being propagated here is that no voters were swayed by Libertas and their evil CIA masters. UKIP are in the mix because politics makes strange bedfellows.

    One would imagine that Libertas/CIA/US Military threads should be thrown out of the politics thread into the conspiracy theory forum, but are not of course because they support the "yes" point of view.

    Not really - it's frankly a bit embarrassing, and I for one would be perfectly happy to see it banished to CT. Unfortunately, because it's been put forward by some relative heavyweights like MEPs, it gets to live.

    In a sense, I'm not surprised Libertas don't bother quashing it - it's a red herring, which distracts from the far more prosaic, yet far more damaging conclusion - that Libertas is backed by Ganley and a few other rich businessmen as a 'private' political vehicle.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #13
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    dresden8 wrote: »
    One would imagine that Libertas/CIA/US Military threads should be thrown out of the politics thread into the conspiracy theory forum, but are not of course because they support the "yes" point of view.
    The CIA and conspiracy theories are not mentioned in the linked article; they are a red herring thrown in by the OP. This thread is based on a press release from the Labour Party.

    Still, it would be a shame to miss an opportunity to implicitly complain about biased moderation, wouldn't it?


  • Options
    #14
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    Okay, we'll come at this another way.

    Rich people have always influenced politics. That's what the tent in Galway was about. So what?

    Ganley has links to the US military. So what? What are the heavyweight MEPs trying to imply?


  • Options
    #15
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Rich people have always influenced politics. That's what the tent in Galway was about. So what?
    You believe that rich people influencing politicians through shady deals in Galway tents is perfectly acceptable?
    Ganley has links to the US military. So what? What are the heavyweight MEPs trying to imply?
    You don't think Libertas have any questions whatsoever to answer?


  • Options
    #16
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,316 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    If the US army are recruiting here I wish I knew where to go. Really need a job.


  • Options
    #17
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    You believe that rich people influencing politicians through shady deals in Galway tents is perfectly acceptable?

    I don't actually. But the likes of Dick Roche and other FF heads calling Ganley to explain himself is pure hypocrisy.

    oscarBravo wrote: »
    You don't think Libertas have any questions whatsoever to answer?

    What are the questions our political heavyweight masters want him to answer? We at least now know the source of Ganleys money. So what?


  • Options
    #18
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    dresden8 wrote: »
    I don't actually. But the likes of Dick Roche and other FF heads calling Ganley to explain himself is pure hypocrisy.
    I'm not sure how that differs from saying "but sure isn't everyone at it, so that's alright." If transparency is important in politics, it's important on all sides.
    What are the questions our political heavyweight masters want him to answer? We at least now know the source of Ganleys money. So what?
    As long as his money was used to secure the "right" result from your perspective, I guess it doesn't matter at all. For those of us who feel that democracy was subverted, it's kind of important to understand what the motive was for spending a lot of money doing so.


  • Options
    #19
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    Who subverted it and how?


  • Options
    #20
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Anyone who spent enormous sums of money to spread FUD and lies about the treaty. Again, you seem to have a tolerance for that sort of thing as long as it's done by both sides, but I'd rather see some transparency.


  • Options
    #21
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    "People are lied to before a vote" shock. That's what happens.

    Can we re-run the last general election so? And the one before that? And the one before that?

    What's the US military and the CIA got to do with anything?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    dresden8 wrote: »
    "People are lied to before a vote" shock. That's what happens.
    Again it seems that the difference between us is that I have a problem with large quantities of money being spent on dishonestly influencing the outcome of a vote.
    Can we re-run the last general election so? And the one before that? And the one before that?
    We re-run them every few years.
    What's the US military and the CIA got to do with anything?
    I've no idea what CIA has to do with anything; I've already said it was a red herring.

    As for the US military, let me ask you a direct question: if the "yes" vote had won, and it transpired that a hitherto unknown businessman with links to (say) the French and German militaries had spent large quantities of money on a dishonest campaign to scare people into voting "yes" - would you be blithely shrugging it off as you are now?


  • Options
    #23
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    As for the US military, let me ask you a direct question: if the "yes" vote had won, and it transpired that a hitherto unknown businessman with links to (say) the French and German militaries had spent large quantities of money on a dishonest campaign to scare people into voting "yes" - would you be blithely shrugging it off as you are now?

    What's your problem with Ganley doing business with the US military? I'm sure there's at least some "Yes" voters/supporters/ who possibly are doing business with the French and German militaries.

    Businessmen do business with whoever will give them €200 million euro. Fair enough.


  • Options
    #24
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Why am I not surprised that you didn't answer the question?


  • Options
    #25
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    As for the US military, let me ask you a direct question: if the "yes" vote had won, and it transpired that a hitherto unknown businessman with links to (say) the French and German militaries had spent large quantities of money on a dishonest campaign to scare people into voting "yes" - would you be blithely shrugging it off as you are now?
    I'm sure there's at least some "Yes" voters/supporters/ who possibly are doing business with the French and German militaries.

    What's your problem with that answer? I'm sure they're already doing business with them. I'm sure when the next vote comes around they will still be doing business with them. Whether the answer is yes or no, it will have no bearing.

    Now back to the original unanswered question (Post #21, if you're interested)

    What's the US military got to do with anything?


  • Options
    #26
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    dresden8 wrote: »
    What's your problem with that answer?
    It's a perfectly satisfactory answer, with one problem: it doesn't answer the question I asked. Re-read my post.
    Now back to the original unanswered question (Post #21, if you're interested)

    What's the US military got to do with anything?
    I don't know. I'd like to know. You know, one of those unanswered questions that, for some reason, you seem anxious not to have asked.


  • Options
    #27
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    It's a perfectly satisfactory answer, with one problem: it doesn't answer the question I asked. Re-read my post.

    But then I qualified in the same paragraph
    Whether the answer is yes or no, it will have no bearing.

    "I don't know. I'd like to know. You know, one of those unanswered questions that, for some reason, you seem anxious not to have asked."

    So, you don't know your problem with the US military. If you don't know the problem, how can you have a problem?

    If I seem anxious not to have the question asked you're being awful obliging in not asking it.


  • Options
    #28
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    dresden8 wrote: »
    But then I qualified in the same paragraph
    Whether the answer is yes or no, it will have no bearing.
    The long and the short of it is, you have no issue whatsoever with large amounts of money changing hands in order to secure political influence?

    On that, we'll agree to differ.
    So, you don't know your problem with the US military. If you don't know the problem, how can you have a problem?

    If I seem anxious not to have the question asked you're being awful obliging in not asking it.
    Since you're determine to take wilful obtuseness to an art form, I'll spell it out for you.

    I don't have a problem with the US military.

    I don't have a problem with Libertas doing business with the US military.

    I do have a problem with a businessman who does a huge amount of business with the US military suddenly popping up, taking an interest in our relationship with the EU, and spending enormous sums of money on creating enough doubt in people's minds to prevent a treaty from being ratified. I have a problem with the lack of transparency involved in the spending of this money.

    My question was whether you would have a problem with this were the shoe on the other foot. You've made it clear you have no problem with clandestine funding of political processes, so I guess I can consider the question answered.


  • Options
    #29
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    Actually no.

    I refer you to my first post in this thread
    So, If we're now against the CIA we can expect the government to tell the CIA to p1ss off out of Shannon now.

    If we're against the US military we can expect the government to tell them to p1ss off out of Shannon too as well.

    Since UKIP have become ardent No supporters and Avril Doyle keeps going on about how we should tell the Brits to keep out of Irish affairs, can we expect Fine Gael to call for a British withdrawal from the north?

    Hypocritical cnuts.

    It's the hypocrisy of the mainstream parties that gets me.

    For this shower of tossers to now come out with this crap is sickening. Where does everybody else's money come from? That's the real question that has never been answered in Irish politics.


  • Options
    #30
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    I don't have a problem with the US military.

    I don't have a problem with Libertas doing business with the US military.

    I do have a problem with a businessman who does a huge amount of business with the US military

    First two statements jar with the third. If you have no problem with the US military why include it like that?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    I posted here 'cause firstly I thought it was interesting that the Labour Party actually had something to say about it.
    A long time after most internet users knew about it I might add. I do feel the net is seriously underused as a political instrument. Funny then that Libertas' PR guy owns Politics.ie! Interesting too that a lot of users see it automatically filed under crackpot conspiracy theories too!

    My problem is none of Ganleys business ventures seem to be in "normal" markets. If there's a war zone or some clusterf*ck going on Ganley seems to be setting up shop there. What's that all about?

    Ganley while well connected in US spook business, is not the only member of Libertas with business connections in the US military. Ulick McEvaddy is the CEO of a US air defence contractor. I mean check this out ffs http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0114/knock.html

    How ironic that they used the sensationalist "We need a European Army" headline for one of their No campaign posters. Not to mention legalised abortion. A little nod to the Youth Defence crowd, no doubt, big No to Nice supporters at that!

    So either the two main operators are genuine in their motivation which would suggest they are amazingly stupid or there's a hidden agenda for their interest in a No vote for Lisbon...

    AW fuggid! Prolly just an over active imagination, nothing to worry about here!


Advertisement