Has Declan Ganley / Coir hired a team of shills?

ei.sdraob

Happy Monday wrote: »

English will not be the first language of your European masters either......

who are these masters you speak of

zenno

K-9 wrote: »

Facepalm!

It would be easy to do a tit for tat, so what are the real issues?

a tit for tat "facepalm" ? i know the way i'm voting now and after all the s*ite i've heard from you and the yes side i have to agree that after all this time of reading all your insignificant posts you should be banned for false information regarding some of your posts period. none of you on the yes side have given any proper clarity on lisbon or anything for that matter except slag the no side off. enjoy the next two weeks of talking garbage as you normally do. as i see people with a bit more input than you on the no side have more clarification on this issue.

ei.sdraob

zenno wrote: »

a tit for tat "facepalm" ? i know the way i'm voting now and after all the s*ite i've heard from you and the yes side i have to agree that after all this time of reading all your insignificant posts you should be banned for false information regarding some of your posts period. none of you on the yes side have given any proper clarity on lisbon or anything for that matter except slag the no side off. enjoy the next two weeks of talking garbage as you normally do. as i see people with a bit more input than you on the no side have more clarification on this issue.

here is some reading you may be interested in

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055633086

K-9

zenno wrote: »

a tit for tat "facepalm" ? i know the way i'm voting now and after all the s*ite i've heard from you and the yes side i have to agree that after all this time of reading all your insignificant posts you should be banned for false information regarding some of your posts period. none of you on the yes side have given any proper clarity on lisbon or anything for that matter except slag the no side off. enjoy the next two weeks of talking garbage as you normally do. as i see people with a bit more input than you on the no side have more clarification on this issue.

I'll ignore the usual stuff, but what false information?

Quite a serious claim there, which I'd expect some proof of.

Daftendirekt

zenno wrote: »

a tit for tat "facepalm" ? i know the way i'm voting now and after all the s*ite i've heard from you and the yes side i have to agree that after all this time of reading all your insignificant posts you should be banned for false information regarding some of your posts period. none of you on the yes side have given any proper clarity on lisbon or anything for that matter except slag the no side off. enjoy the next two weeks of talking garbage as you normally do. as i see people with a bit more input than you on the no side have more clarification on this issue.

Oh, the irony.

meglome

Daftendirekt wrote: »

Oh, the irony.

Unfortunately some of these guys hang out in the conspiracy theory's forum so I've had the dubious honour before, irony is most definitely lost on them and don't think showing fact with backup evidence will make any difference.

sceptre

zenno wrote: »

you should be banned for false information regarding some of your posts period.

The mods are the guys who get to make that call.

You're the guy who gets to report posts where necessary to help us make that call.

Throwing stuff like that at another poster, regardless of what side they're on (your side, their side, up, down, whatever) hasn't got a place here. As usual, this is a moderation call, complaints on the Help Desk or by me to PM.

optocynic

CD87 wrote: »

As I have made clear, I am voting and I am voting no.

Out of petulance... not out of an informed position!!

meditraitor

Sleepy wrote: »

Seriously?

The amount of newbie posters spouting nonsense 'reasons' to vote no to Lisbon in posts that often make it very clear that English isn't their first language...

Is this the beginning of a new age of political campaigning through the spreading of misinformation on the internet? If so, is this something we want to allow on boards? Should we be looking at a minimum post count before one is allowed to post on Politics?

For what it's worth, I'm pretty certain I'm voting yes to the treaty based mainly on the fact that the only one's against it are the crackpots and I've not heard a single solid reason to vote no.

Having looked at this forum lately I agree with this theory.......

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055685052
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055685064
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055684466
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055680556
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055684584

Just a feeling I get when I see thread like above

mickoneill30

meditraitor wrote: »

Having looked at this forum lately I agree with this theory.......

I'd kind of agree too. But a lot of those guys with few post counts and opinionated views seem to come across as a bit looney and it's easy to pick the gaping holes in a lot of their arguments. It might not be a the best tactic if you want to get people to vote your way.

dermot_sheehan

I've been lurking in this forum a bit.

It looks like a bit of astro turfing from some keyboard warriors. Perhaps from the other side of the irish sea or the atlantic.

Or indeed it could be libertas. Their press officer was rather infamous in college for starting whispering campaigns against his enemies by email. He got thrown out of Fianna Fail for setting up an email account FFinsider@hotmail.com and emailing internal binchy communications to the phoenix.

Strange we have a libertasinsider blog now.

Internet shenanigans are not beyond the capabilities or inclinations of the libertas crew.

Ronan|Raven

Some of the utter ****e from certain posters I see here reminds me of a fella I had the misfortune of meeting last year stating that the recession was created to punish us for voting no.......

Jew Jitsu

Sleepy wrote: »

Seriously?

The amount of newbie posters spouting nonsense 'reasons' to vote no to Lisbon in posts that often make it very clear that English isn't their first language...

Is this the beginning of a new age of political campaigning through the spreading of misinformation on the internet? If so, is this something we want to allow on boards? Should we be looking at a minimum post count before one is allowed to post on Politics?

For what it's worth, I'm pretty certain I'm voting yes to the treaty based mainly on the fact that the only one's against it are the crackpots and I've not heard a single solid reason to vote no.

I'm new here and that has nothing to do with politics at all,my opinion is just as valid as yours.Why do you think you have a supreme right to others because of the length of time you have been here?Seniority is not recognised in forums so sorry to burst the bubble.

I will give you one reason to vote no since you don't have one,

In the last 6 months 300 palistinian children were killed by Isreali soldiers.Yet the EU will not impose sanctions.The EU support Isreali genocide,Vote No to Lisbon.

I will be voting NO for the shear fact that there are alot of biggots here who think they have the right to impose the YES vote on other members without discussing the treaty and the positives of voting NO(yeah yeah yeah there are no positives!).I will not become a sheep by following narrow-minded posters on this site and by following the other EU countries by voting yes.We had people who strived to get us democracy and independance and now we are going to conform and let a higher community have power over us.Sorry but it happened once and it won't happen again.

By voting yes,people are insulting the democracy of Ireland.We voted No and it should have been accepted, but we are voting again now as if we are run by Robert Mugabe himself! Whats next? Are we going to re-vote the presidential election when it next happens?"Little" Ireland will not be made a fool of by the EU or the government and this will be shown when the No party triumphs in 2 weeks.The government are denying the inevitable,we said No before and we will again!!here here

I got my voting card today, and along with it I put a bottle of champagne on ice.And in 2 weeks, when the Lisbon Treaty will have failed miserably to conform us, it will be YES,YES,YES all around.

JJ

Scofflaw

We're not claiming Libertas would hire just anybody, of course.

amused,
Scofflaw

Jew Jitsu

Scofflaw wrote: »

We're not claiming Libertas would hire just anybody, of course.

amused,
Scofflaw

May I get in on the joke flaw? Are you refering to the shambles this country has become by re-voting when the citizens of this "democratic" country already voted No? I would appreciate it if you could clarify, Thanks

BEWILDERED,
JJ

zenno

gabhain7 wrote: »

I've been lurking in this forum a bit.

It looks like a bit of astro turfing from some keyboard warriors. Perhaps from the other side of the irish sea or the atlantic.

Or indeed it could be libertas. Their press officer was rather infamous in college for starting whispering campaigns against his enemies by email. He got thrown out of Fianna Fail for setting up an email account FFinsider@hotmail.com and emailing internal binchy communications to the phoenix.

Strange we have a libertasinsider blog now.

Internet shenanigans are not beyond the capabilities or inclinations of the libertas crew.

gabhain7 you are banned from this forum for posting paranoia ejections to other posters. 7 day BAN .

Scofflaw

Jew Jitsu wrote: »

May I get in on the joke flaw? Are you refering to the shambles this country has become by re-voting when the citizens of this "democratic" country already voted No? I would appreciate it if you could clarify, Thanks

BEWILDERED,
JJ

Ah, bustertherat, rusterthebat. Might have known.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

zenno wrote: »

gabhain7 you are banned from this forum for posting paranoia ejections to other posters. 7 day BAN .

Read the Charter.

moderately,
Scofflaw

ixtlan

Jew Jitsu wrote: »

I will give you one reason to vote no since you don't have one,

In the last 6 months 300 palistinian children were killed by Isreali soldiers.Yet the EU will not impose sanctions.The EU support Isreali genocide,Vote No to Lisbon.

Many people feel that Lisbon will help the EU (And Ireland) deal better with the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. http://euobserver.com/9/27351

Some quotes...

At one stage, Israeli President Shimon Peres had an array of European interlocutors, including three EU foreign ministers, the EU external relations commissioner and the EU's foreign policy chief. In addition, French President Nicolas Sarkozy was in the area in an unofficial capacity, but was working on a high-profile solution to the conflict.

Commenting on Mr Sarkozy's unilateral efforts to resolve the crisis, Italian foreign minister Franco Frattini said:
"When everyone conducts one's own mission, it weakens our strategic position."

The EU's reponse in the Middle East "shows the need for the Treaty of Lisbon and especially the solutions it offers with the president of the European Council and the EU foreign minister," German centre-right MEP Elmar Brok told this website.He stressed the importance of the people concerned in such situations "all calling the same person [in the EU]."

Commenting on the fact that the EU had two delegations in the Middle East at the same time, Clara O'Donnell, foreign policy expert at the London-based Centre for European Reform, said:
"The EU is not taken credibly anyway ... and when it does things like that, it does not help."

The question is, acting alone in foreign policy, have we, the Irish, done much to resolve this conflict?

And of course I must mention that imposing sanctions would be a common foreign policy...

Ix

ei.sdraob

ixtlan wrote: »

Many people feel that Lisbon will help the EU (And Ireland) deal better with the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. http://euobserver.com/9/27351

Ix unfortunately there is a large yellow NO poster about 2x3 meters on the lawn outside Clarinbridge, Galway (if im out in that direction again ill try get a picture)

it goes along the lines of "Israel killed 300 Palestinians, VOTE NO"




it makes me sick as I feel strongly about I/P conflict and more united EU would be better able to deal with them

Sam Vimes

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Ix unfortunately there is a large yellow NO poster about 2x3 meters on the lawn outside Clarinbridge, Galway (if im out in that direction again ill try get a picture)

it goes along the lines of "Israel killed 300 Palestinians, VOTE NO"




it makes me sick as I feel strongly about I/P conflict and more united EU would be better able to deal with them

I saw this group out next to croke park just before the U2 gig a few weeks ago. I told them I was going to do up some posters saying "I like chicken. Vote yes!" because it was just as relevant. :pac:

Sam Vimes

Jew Jitsu wrote: »

In the last 6 months 300 palistinian children were killed by Isreali soldiers.Yet the EU will not impose sanctions.The EU support Isreali genocide,Vote No to Lisbon.

I could be wrong about this but aren't the EU countries prevented from imposing sanctions by the US veto in the UN?

smokingman

Getting back to the thread title, I think it's pretty obvious the OP is right.
I also notice ganley is trying to distance himself from Coir saying he is not associated with them in any way. Wouldn't blame him, especially after the Catholic church itself came out and endorsed Lisbon. Coir seem to be anything but a christian group to be honest given how they aren't aligned with the Pope on this one and the fact they buried their head in the sand when the Ryan report came out, refusing to condemn the insidious behaviour of those paedophiles.

ei.sdraob

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I could be wrong about this but aren't the EU countries prevented from imposing sanctions by the US veto in the UN?

if all the EU countries act as one when it comes to foreign policy the US would have a hard time pushing their ****

Scofflaw

smokingman wrote: »

Getting back to the thread title, I think it's pretty obvious the OP is right.
I also notice ganley is trying to distance himself from Coir saying he is not associated with them in any way. Wouldn't blame him, especially after the Catholic church itself came out and endorsed Lisbon. Coir seem to be anything but a christian group to be honest given how they aren't aligned with the Pope on this one and the fact they buried their head in the sand when the Ryan report came out, refusing to condemn the insidious behaviour of those paedophiles.

It's funny, really, though, that he has such close links with the pro-life movements, and that his interviews always seem to manage to mention the fact that he's a devout Catholic:

With the trappings of wealth that come with having made a multimillion fortune in aluminium, forestry and telecommunications, you might think it difficult for this English-born Irish businessman to paint himself as David against Goliath in the coming Lisbon treaty referendum. …
Cigars appear to be the only vice of this teetotal, devout Catholic, so however tempting it may seem to encourage comparisons with the wartime Winston Churchill, faced with overwhelming military force from the Continent, he won’t go there. …

"It’s like that scene in Braveheart with the lads with the sharpened staves and the English heavy cavalry charging. And I was basically saying, ‘wait, wait, wait’ and then at the last minute you pull up the big 12-foot-long sharpened staves and you impale the bastards on their own argument…."

cordially,
Scofflaw

smokingman

Y'know, I'd love to hear from someone on these boards that actually isn't a plant for the "no" marketing campaign. I'm really getting tired of the crazies newly registered with 10 posts, all of which make no sense and lie through their teeth.

Ah well, that's t'internet marketing for you

mickoneill30

smokingman wrote: »

Y'know, I'd love to hear from someone on these boards that actually isn't a plant for the "no" marketing campaign. I'm really getting tired of the crazies newly registered with 10 posts, all of which make no sense and lie through their teeth.

I think they might be a good thing though. If you're of average intelligence and leaning towards No and then read some of those posts from some of the new guys I'd say it'd push you towards the Yes side or at least might prompt you to educate yourself to see if some of the claims are correct.

Coriolanus

In my experience Mich, the batshi^craziness of any claims made don't seem to deter many people at all from believing them outright.

Despite God knows how many refutations on the issue, for example, they're still claiming that the min wage is gonna drop to 1.84 and you still hear people on the street repeating the claims.

I swear, the vote will come down to which poster people see last before going into the voting booth.

vanla sighs

Sleepy wrote: »

Seriously?

The amount of newbie posters spouting nonsense 'reasons' to vote no to Lisbon in posts that often make it very clear that English isn't their first language...

Is this the beginning of a new age of political campaigning through the spreading of misinformation on the internet? If so, is this something we want to allow on boards? Should we be looking at a minimum post count before one is allowed to post on Politics?

For what it's worth, I'm pretty certain I'm voting yes to the treaty based mainly on the fact that the only one's against it are the crackpots and I've not heard a single solid reason to vote no.

Lol, you want to stifle debate because you don't agree with what's being said I think I get the jist of it. As regards "crackpots" you then must be referring to the majority of Irish voters who rejected Lisbon already?

marco_polo

vanla sighs wrote: »

Lol, you want to stifle debate because you don't agree with what's being said I think I get the jist of it. As regards "crackpots" you then must be referring to the majority of Irish voters who rejected Lisbon already?

No just the ones pedalling lies about abortion, neutrality, taxation, immigration etc.