Labour Party on Libertas/CIA CT.

dresden8

studiorat wrote: »

I posted here 'cause firstly I thought it was interesting that the Labour Party actually had something to say about it.

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's 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. Their PR Guy owns politics.ie BTW.

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...

Now we're into conspiracy theory territory.

studiorat

dresden8 wrote: »

Now we're into conspiracy theory territory.

Shrug it off like that if you wish.

Maybe in the spirit of healthy debate you'd point out a particular fact that you would consider as a conspiracy. Or maybe you think the whole thing is..

You edited the post so maybe not...

I for one do not believe that their motives are in the interest of the country.

dresden8

Well you do love your "..."

I suspect Ganley is in warzones and stuff because there is a shed load of money to be made. I doubt he goes there himself though, just creams the money off the top.

studiorat

dresden8 wrote: »

Well you do love your "..."

[/QUOTE]
I suspect Ganley is in warzones and stuff because there is a shed load of money to be made. I doubt he goes there himself though, just creams the money off the top.[/QUOTE]


YEEEESSSS I do.
It means I'd go on but I won't bother...

As far as I know he spend a fair bit of time wandering around Eastern Europe back in the day... (See?)

dresden8

Just to put a bit of context. Ganley has €200m worth of business.

The Irish defence industry is worth €3 billion.

Do we have questions to ask these people about who their contracts are with and which way they voted/lobbied spent money on Lisbon?

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2008/05/25/story33124.asp

Scofflaw

dresden8 wrote: »

Just to put a bit of context. Ganley has €200m worth of business.

The Irish defence industry is worth €3 billion.

Do we have questions to ask these people about who their contracts are with and which way they voted/lobbied spent money on Lisbon?

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2008/05/25/story33124.asp

Well, we could ask McEvaddy as well!

If the Irish arms industry has contributed to Irish political parties, that would be a matter of record, assuming we're talking large donations. Do you reckon any of the Irish defence industry subbed either campaign to the tune of at least €200,000?

I appreciate that you're not quite defending Libertas as much as pointing out that questions should be asked equally of both sides - and I would favour that - but I think that dismissing the question because of one source of it (FF) is an ad hominem, the more so since FF are not the only one asking it.

If we want to know something (where Libertas' funding came from, for example), are we to have the question dismissed simply because Dick Roche has asked it in public?

cordially,
Scofflaw

studiorat

dresden8 wrote: »

Just to put a bit of context. Ganley has €200m worth of business.

The Irish defence industry is worth €3 billion.

Do we have questions to ask these people about who their contracts are with and which way they voted/lobbied spent money on Lisbon?

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2008/05/25/story33124.asp

Licences for military contracts last year was to the value of €33m. The rest was of dual use, mostly civilian according to the article.

I'm a firm believer in ethical business practices. And I reckon there's a difference between selling springs for hummers and wanting US military planes to land in Knock. (The CEO of an US air defence contractor who's sitting on the board of Knock airport "seeing no reason why US military planes could land at Knock"? Well of course not, but I can't help thinking that decision may have just the smallest bit of self interest.)

As for your other question I certainly believe we should know who these contracts are with. Are you suggesting we let anybody sell anything they want to whoever they want?

Certainly their vote is a private matter, but if they are lobbying Govnt. and running campaigns (on either side) for a change in the constitution -nevermind run a "political party"- I would certainly like to know some background and where they got their funds from. Otherwise the guy with the most money gets the advantage! Not a good thing in the running of a country IMO.;)

Good night sir!

dresden8

studiorat wrote: »

Certainly their vote is a private matter, but if they are lobbying Govnt. and running campaigns (on either side) for a change in the constitution -nevermind run a "political party"- I would certainly like to know some background and where they got their funds from. Otherwise the guy with the most money gets the advantage! Not a good thing in the running of a country IMO.;)

No, seriously. Are you not aware of how things are done in this country?

studiorat

dresden8 wrote: »

No, seriously. Are you not aware of how things are done in this country?

too much so.

studiorat

...

dresden8

Scofflaw wrote: »

If we want to know something (where Libertas' funding came from, for example), are we to have the question dismissed simply because Dick Roche has asked it in public?

cordially,
Scofflaw

It should probably be dismissed because Roche is a fool.

But again, I see you see my point about the hypocrisy (yes, my choice of word) of the mainstream parties.

Ganleys finances and motives are only being questioned because he supported the no vote. If he had campaigned for yes, the government and opposition would have been quite happy to have him on board.

If we're down to enquiring about where people's money came from, I think FF were asked that question first, and a satisfactory answer has not been forthcoming. At least Ganley doesn't claim he won the money on the horses.

I suppose he could claim it came from "Paddy the Mercenary"!

lostexpectation

they play down the military angle on the yes side and play it up on the no side...?

Scofflaw

dresden8 wrote: »

It should probably be dismissed because Roche is a fool.

But again, I see you see my point about the hypocrisy (yes, my choice of word) of the mainstream parties.

Ganleys finances and motives are only being questioned because he supported the no vote. If he had campaigned for yes, the government and opposition would have been quite happy to have him on board.

If we're down to enquiring about where people's money came from, I think FF were asked that question first, and a satisfactory answer has not been forthcoming. At least Ganley doesn't claim he won the money on the horses.

I suppose he could claim it came from "Paddy the Mercenary"!

Hmm. Yes, the government and opposition ask these questions because Ganley was on the other side from them. As far as I can tell, you then defend them because he is on the same side as you, plus throwing the question back at them because they are on the other side from you.

So far, so partisan, and answers no questions. However, FF are already up at Dublin Castle being asked questions about their 'donations', so now can we the interested electorate ask Libertas? Or are you saying we should have to wait twenty years for those answers as well?


cordially,
Scofflaw

dresden8

We know the libertas answers. It's Ganleys money for his own personal crusade, for whatever reasons.

Oh and I wasn't defending Ganley. I think he's an odious m/fer. Once again it's the hypocrisy of these tossers. Especially Roche.

I'd like to go back to a question not answered earlier. What's the big deal with his connections to the US military?

Scofflaw

dresden8 wrote: »

We know the libertas answers. It's Ganleys money for his own personal crusade, for whatever reasons.

Oh and I wasn't defending Ganley. I think he's an odious m/fer. Once again it's the hypocrisy of these tossers. Especially Roche.

Fair enough - particularly on "Tara, what archaeological heritage?" Roach.

dresden8 wrote: »

I'd like to go back to a question not answered earlier. What's the big deal with his connections to the US military?

That I couldn't entirely say - after all, the one point Libertas never touched was neutrality.

I imagine, though, that being hand in glove with the US military/neocon complex makes personal crusades for "openness and transparency in Europe" ring a little hollow. After all, if you wanted an example of openness and transparency, you wouldn't be looking at the neocons or the US military for inspiration (or the Irish government, of course) - and the "hand in glove" thing is really quite strong - Admirals on the board, sweetheart deals, etc. Would you trust Dick Cheney if he went on a crusade for "openness and transparency"?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Valcin

dresden8 wrote: »

We know the libertas answers. It's Ganleys money for his own personal crusade, for whatever reasons.

Oh and I wasn't defending Ganley. I think he's an odious m/fer. Once again it's the hypocrisy of these tossers. Especially Roche.

I'd like to go back to a question not answered earlier. What's the big deal with his connections to the US military?

The US miltary is fighting a war in Iraq. The main countries at the heart of the EU are against this war and two of the largest, France and Germany, have been its biggest critics. There is a general anti-US foreign policy feeling at the core of the EU countries.
The US also has issues with Russia.
Its main allies in Europe have been especially the eastern european countries and the UK and Ireland(due to the use of shannon).
The Lisbon treaty unites the EU further. This brings the US allies of eastern europe and UK closer to France and Germany who have been opponents of US military action.

The Lisbon treaty is in the interest of the US from an economic viewpoint as it gives it one market to deal with and its good for business but from a strategic military view you would have to say its bad because it may lead to closer foreign policy cooperation which could go against the US. While european countries are divided the US can bully the individual small countries to do what they want. I would imagine the US have made sure that there would be consequences for ireland if we stopped letting planes land in shannon. Ireland under a stronger union of countries would much easily be able to follow the wish of the people and not allow the planes to land.

It is unbelievable how people can not think it is outrageous that someone like Ganley has arrived out of nowhere just before the referendum in ireland pushing for a no vote and we are to believe he is just doing it out of the goodness of his heart.

Why does Ganley care so much?

Ganley is CEO of Rivada, a company that makes miltary equipment for the US military. His income comes from the continuation of US military action. He received 37.3million in contracts from the US government over the last 4 years in "no bid" contests which is a loophole in the law where by no other companies are allowed to bid for the contracts. It is something to do with some loophole where Eskimo companies get contracts without anyone else being allowed to bid. The law had been changed after the Halliburton scandels but they still got them on this loophole. If you think thats conspiracy theory check it out in the Irish Times:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/newsfeatures/2008/0705/1215184125729.html

He writes for the US Foreign Policy Research Institute which is a think tank set up to push US foreign policy. Heres one of his articles:
http://www.fpri.org/enotes/20030311.ganley.europedirection.html

Someone with links that close to a foreign military should not be anywhere near a constitutional campaign in ireland.
You have to ask what do you think the US wanted in return for those contracts?

He is now dedicating himself to some rubbish campaign for "openness and transparency", who the hell would go to all the trouble hes gone to for that. Almost everything in the Libertas campaign has been proved to be absolute spoof. Serious questions need to be asked as to where the money came from, they spent more than all the politcal parties together on their spoof campaign. It is obvious as hell why he was supporting the no campaign. His links are way, way too close to the US military and the US military has way too much of a vested interest in the outcome being no for him to have any credibility.

There is a monumental difference between some gangster TD's taking some backhanders so that some property developer can get a contract to build a hotel and a referendum on our constitution being undermined by a foreign influence.

DublinWriter

Valcin wrote: »

Someone with links that close to a foreign military should not be anywhere near a constitutional campaign in ireland.

US Military Planes. Shannon. Hypocrisy? Much.

dresden8

Valcin wrote: »

The US miltary is fighting a war in Iraq. The main countries at the heart of the EU are against this war and two of the largest, France and Germany, have been its biggest critics. There is a general anti-US foreign policy feeling at the core of the EU countries.
The US also has issues with Russia.
Its main allies in Europe have been especially the eastern european countries and the UK and Ireland(due to the use of shannon).
The Lisbon treaty unites the EU further. This brings the US allies of eastern europe and UK closer to France and Germany who have been opponents of US military action.

The Lisbon treaty is in the interest of the US from an economic viewpoint as it gives it one market to deal with and its good for business but from a strategic military view you would have to say its bad because it may lead to closer foreign policy cooperation which could go against the US. While european countries are divided the US can bully the individual small countries to do what they want. I would imagine the US have made sure that there would be consequences for ireland if we stopped letting planes land in shannon. Ireland under a stronger union of countries would much easily be able to follow the wish of the people and not allow the planes to land.

It is unbelievable how people can not think it is outrageous that someone like Ganley has arrived out of nowhere just before the referendum in ireland pushing for a no vote and we are to believe he is just doing it out of the goodness of his heart.

Why does Ganley care so much?

Ganley is CEO of Rivada, a company that makes miltary equipment for the US military. His income comes from the continuation of US military action. He received 37.3million in contracts from the US government over the last 4 years in "no bid" contests which is a loophole in the law where by no other companies are allowed to bid for the contracts. It is something to do with some loophole where Eskimo companies get contracts without anyone else being allowed to bid. The law had been changed after the Halliburton scandels but they still got them on this loophole. If you think thats conspiracy theory check it out in the Irish Times:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/newsfeatures/2008/0705/1215184125729.html

He writes for the US Foreign Policy Research Institute which is a think tank set up to push US foreign policy. Heres one of his articles:
http://www.fpri.org/enotes/20030311.ganley.europedirection.html

Someone with links that close to a foreign military should not be anywhere near a constitutional campaign in ireland.
You have to ask what do you think the US wanted in return for those contracts?

He is now dedicating himself to some rubbish campaign for "openness and transparency", who the hell would go to all the trouble hes gone to for that. Almost everything in the Libertas campaign has been proved to be absolute spoof. Serious questions need to be asked as to where the money came from, they spent more than all the politcal parties together on their spoof campaign. It is obvious as hell why he was supporting the no campaign. His links are way, way too close to the US military and the US military has way too much of a vested interest in the outcome being no for him to have any credibility.

There is a monumental difference between some gangster TD's taking some backhanders so that some property developer can get a contract to build a hotel and a referendum on our constitution being undermined by a foreign influence.

So what you're saying is that the US government is conspiring to undermine democracy in Ireland and Europe by funding a Quisling organisation to disrupt the Irish political system.

If our political leaders really believe that, why are they asking that question of Ganley and not the American Ambassadors all over Europe? Why isn't Sarkozy, as President of the Union, not taking this up at the highest levels of the US government?

If the Irish government really believe we're under attack this way why hasn't the American ambassador been expelled? We're fighting for our future here Goddammit!

oscarBravo

dresden8 wrote: »

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

If you need to selectively quote me to the extent of altering the meaning of my post, you clearly don't have much faith in the quality of your argument.

Deadeyes

dresden8 wrote: »

So what you're saying is that the US government is conspiring to undermine democracy in Ireland and Europe by funding a Quisling organisation to disrupt the Irish political system.

It's not like they haven't done it before. Overtly it's called the The National Endowment for Democracy.<tin foil hat>Covertly who knows what the C.I.A. are doing.</tin foil hat>

http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/usmeddling.htm

dresden8

oscarBravo wrote: »

If you need to selectively quote me to the extent of altering the meaning of my post, you clearly don't have much faith in the quality of your argument.

If you have no problems with the US military why do you have a problem with someone who has connections with the US military.

Anyway, I'm off now to see if the US military will give me €200m to vote no again. I'll be back later.

oscarBravo

dresden8 wrote: »

If you have no problems with the US military why do you have a problem with someone who has connections with the US military.

When you're interested in discussing what I said, come back to me. This straw man was already boring the first time I called you on it.

dresden8

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.

Ok, we know you don't like Ganley and the way he goes on. We know you don't like Libertas and the way they go on.

What has this got to do with the American military?

oscarBravo

dresden8 wrote: »

Ok, we know you don't like Ganley and the way he goes on. We know you don't like Libertas and the way they go on.

What has this got to do with the American military?

I've already answered this, more than once. I framed one of those replies as a direct question to you, which you refused to answer.

dresden8

oscarBravo wrote: »

I've already answered this, more than once. I framed one of those replies as a direct question to you, which you refused to answer.

No, no you didn't.

oscarBravo

dresden8 wrote: »

No, no you didn't.

Yes, yes I did.

dresden8

Already answered Oscar. The answer is that I'm sure some of Pro-Lisbon voters /supporters already do have contracts with foreign military powers. Irish defence Industry is apparently worth €3 billion, with a b.

I'm not hounding them for their backgrounds or asking what their nefarious, dark, secret and treasonous reasons might be.

Once again, If you don't know what your problem is, how can you have a problem? If you want to make accusations, make them. Stop living in the land of insinuation and innuendo.

So once again, what's you problem with the American military?

Oh, and I was onto the American embassy. They said I can eff off if I think I'm getting €200m off them. Makes me hate Ganley all the more that does. One law for the rich and one law for everybody else.

oscarBravo

dresden8 wrote: »

Already answered Oscar. The answer is that I'm sure some of Pro-Lisbon voters /supporters already do have contracts with foreign military powers. Irish defence Industry is apparently worth €3 billion, with a b.

And I've already pointed out that that's not an answer to the question. Did you think I wouldn't notice you dodging question the second time, when I noticed the first time?

I'm not hounding them for their backgrounds or asking what their nefarious, dark, secret and treasonous reasons might be.

Would you be, if they had spent huge quantities of money on spreading lies and disinformation and thus helped secure a "yes" vote?

Oh sorry, I've already asked you that, and you've pointedly refused to answer it. Twice.

Once again, If you don't know what your problem is, how can you have a problem? If you want to make accusations, make them. Stop living in the land of insinuation and innuendo.

I honestly don't think you're as stupid as you're trying to pretend you are here, so please re-read what I've already posted.

dresden8

Ok Oscar, since I'm so stupid please put the question in simple terms for me.

I'll put my questions to you in simple terms too.

What specific questions does Ganley have to answer?

What specific accusations are you making?

Why are the Yes voters bringing the US Military and the CIA into the discussion? What specific accusations are they making?

molloyjh

dresden8 wrote: »

Ok Oscar, since I'm so stupid please put the question in simple terms for me.

Dresden I believe he said you weren't stupid.

dresden8 wrote: »

What specific questions does Ganley have to answer?

For my part I want to see where exactly the money came from and (honestly) why he was getting involved. For some crusader for transparency etc his funding and motives are far from transparent. Additionally where was he for the GE last year when a potential crook was going for re-election? And why did he feel the need to peddle lies in search of openess and transparency? Surely that is the very definition of hypocracy.

dresden8 wrote: »

What specific accusations are you making?

Few people are making actual allegations other than one like you own, i.e. that he's a bit dodgy. The whole point is that nbeither he nor his campaign were either open or transparent. That is obviously going to breed distrust.

dresden8 wrote: »

Why are the Yes voters bringing the US Military and the CIA into the discussion? What specific accusations are they making?

As OB pointed out the CIA thing at least is a red herring. There has been a lot of discussion re the military element though. I'm not sure I fully get it myself, something akin to the fact that a stronger EU means more competition for the US and ultimately may mean the EU supplanting the US as the centre of the economic world, which would obviously be bad news for the American military. I can't see myself how this would affect Ganley personally given that even if it were to happen it would take decades........