International funding for Irish Referenda

Victor

CrabRevolution wrote: »

Reminds me of a thread in the farming forum where removing EU+state support for Irish farmers and leaving them to sink or swim at the mercy of the market was described as "leftist thinking".

This is correct. Farm supports exist to maintain a larger than otherwise rural population. Rural populations are more conservative than urban ones.

Victor

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

What about say Peter McVerry? Most of his funding goes to homeless people what if they advocate for more spending on homeless sehelters or stronger anti eviction laws. Do they then preclude foreign donations.

It's an interesting question, but I would separate elections and referendums from legislation and policy matters.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Also, in an open economy whats to stop a non Irish person setting up an Irish organisation/company that then paying the money that way?

Ban corporate donations. Allow political party membership fees and small donations. Potentially, allow single-purpose political parties.

seanin4711

whats in it for George?

steddyeddy

CrabRevolution wrote: »

Reminds me of a thread in the farming forum where removing EU+state support for Irish farmers and leaving them to sink or swim at the mercy of the market was described as "leftist thinking".

The terms right and left are meaningless when used as an insult.

recedite

Victor wrote: »

I would separate elections and referendums from legislation and policy matters.

But the law which SIPO is following does not make that distinction. Quite rightly too IMO.

Anyone remember Frank Dunlop & Associates? The main purpose of the enterprise was to influence public policy in regard to land rezoning decisions, by keeping a certain number of politicians in Frank's pocket.

AnGaelach

markodaly wrote: »

SIPO have threatened to send a file to the DPP if this money isn't given back. Ball in Amnesty Ireland's court now. I guess O'Gorman would love to be a martyr for a cause, most egomaniacs are, but he will hurt the organisation in the long term. Who are the board members, here? Could they not tell O'Gorman to cop on and comply with the laws of the land?

It's an echo chamber. People like himself only socialise with those with the same views, they reinforce each other in their nonsense.

With any luck, the DPP will pull the corporate veil and hold O'Gorman personally liable but I'll settle for them nailing Amnesty to the wall.

mrhoppy

seanin4711 wrote: »

whats in it for George?

I'm not actually too sure. Although I think he likes messing with countries' policies for the craic in it

TheFatHombre

So recently its come to my attention that amnesty international has accepted funds from open society, now Im sure your saying, well whats it got to do with the 8th amendmant?. Well open society is a group funded by hungarian george soros. Soros has led a campaign for abortion all over europe since the 80s. And now he funds the prochoice movement in ireland, now if his intentions wore noble I would not have an issue with this, but it appears he cares not for the women/babies rather that of his cultural marxist beliefs which are the overthrow of the family unit and in this case traditional irish values. So i ask why is this not been reported in the media?, why is our politicians not calling out this foreign money influencing our democratic system? Is it because both our government and media aspire to the same ideaologies of the radical left and soros? Its a topic for definite debate. So i would like to hear opinions of those who are familiar with this man and his work to offer more insight, thank you

david75

You could also ask where the vast amounts of money the pro life campaign seems to have comes from. Massive ad campaigns like theirs cost serious money. As does printing thousands of posters and flying loads of Americans over to take part in the march.
Yet they claimed they got €200k ~ in 2017 from public donations. They have far more than that and haven’t detailed where any of it came from.

TheFatHombre

david75 wrote: »

You could also ask where the vast amounts of money the pro life campaign seems to have comes from. Massive ad campaigns like theirs cost serious money. As does printing thousands of posters and flying loads of Americans over to take part in the march.
Yet they claimed they got €200k ~ in 2017 from public donations. They have far more than that and haven’t detailed where any of it came from.

Well if it came from public donations you would not have a detailed account of exactly were? Alot of people in ireland will fund the prolife because at its core its morally acceptable to save a mother/babies life, if you have some hard facts as to were prolifes money is coming from IE. An outside billionaire like soros, then please be my guest, but i dont see the crime in irish people funding there arguments in an irish referendum do you?

Triangle

TheFatHombre wrote: »

Well if it came from public donations you would not have a detailed account of exactly were? Alot of people in ireland will fund the prolife because at its core its morally acceptable to save a mother/babies life, if you have some hard facts as to were prolifes money is coming from IE. An outside billionaire like soros, then please be my guest, but i dont see the crime in irish people funding there arguments in an irish referendum do you?

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be a pro life person who is bitter at the opposite side getting funding from someone who doesn't have your beliefs.
I've seen pro life vans, stickers and adverts but haven't seen nearly as many from the pro choice side, makes me wonder where all the money is coming from. Maybe a foreign business like the Catholic church perhaps?

david75

TheFatHombre wrote: »

Well if it came from public donations you would not have a detailed account of exactly were? Alot of people in ireland will fund the prolife because at its core its morally acceptable to save a mother/babies life, if you have some hard facts as to were prolifes money is coming from IE. An outside billionaire like soros, then please be my guest, but i dont see the crime in irish people funding there arguments in an irish referendum do you?

Well if they had registered with SIPO we would have that information. But they have not as far as I know. They’re actively fundraising in the US which is the same thing you’re worried about with Soros. Also think they have it coming through via huge amounts of different registered companies all with the same address so they’re loopholing it doing this. But they never declare where the money is coming from. They didn’t when they campaigned against marriage equality either.

Somehow they’re never taken up on it officially. Any orginisation campaigning in a referendum has to register with sipo and open its books. Yet here we are.

Plus there’s no way at all they’d be able to run a campaign on the level they have been on donations from Ireland. That kind of money wouldn’t come near covering it.

TheFatHombre

david75 wrote: »

Well if they had registered with SIPO we would have that information. But they have not as far as I know. They’re actively fundraising in the US which is the same thing you’re worried about with Soros. Also think they have it coming through via huge amounts of different registered companies all with the same address so they’re loopholing it doing this. But they never declare where the money is coming from. They didn’t when they campaigned against marriage equality either.

Somehow they’re never taken up on it officially. Any orginisation campaigning in a referendum has to register with sipo and open its books. Yet here we are.

Plus there’s no way at all they’d be able to run a campaign on the level they have been on donations from Ireland. That kind of money wouldn’t come near covering it.

Again you advocate for the transparency of one side of the aisle whilst complety overlooking the other. The other been a more orchastrated agenda to fund abortion. George soros has given billions to open society to push abortion around europe so again i ask whats this mans agenda? Surely he has one, i mean not everyone is hell bent on killing babies in several countries?, SIPO do not have authority to have information of every donor in the country that would just be ridicolous, why would they need to no the address and were abouts of joe bloggs who donated €2, SIPO is mainly for 3rd party donors would you agree? Not the average citizen

TheFatHombre

Triangle wrote: »

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be a pro life person who is bitter at the opposite side getting funding from someone who doesn't have your beliefs.
I've seen pro life vans, stickers and adverts but haven't seen nearly as many from the pro choice side, makes me wonder where all the money is coming from. Maybe a foreign business like the Catholic church perhaps?

My views are redundant and so are the views of every irishman/woman if were allowing an agenda to be pushed from mr soros and his cronies at the EU, what credibilty does democracy even have anymore?, like i said in my original post why is this not been flaged up, one donor pumping billions into abortion campaigns around europe and if its not for the safety of the mother/baby then whats the real reason?

david75

AFAIK Repeal is registered and compliant with SIPO.
I think your vastly overestimating Soros influence in this campaign. It’s as worrying that an orginisation outside the state is funding and interfering with the campaign, meaning the Catholic Church.
Announcing the Pope is to visit at the same time a referendum campaign is active?

Totally unwelcome outside interference

TheFatHombre

david75 wrote: »

AFAIK Repeal is registered and compliant with SIPO.
I think your vastly overestimating Soros influence in this campaign. It’s as worrying that an orginisation outside the state is funding and interfering with the campaign, meaning the Catholic Church.
Announcing the Pope is to visit at the same time a referendum campaign is active?

Totally unwelcome outside interference

Again im speaking in facts here, open society has already given repeal €250,000 toward there campaign this is a stated fact its why I want answer to why we accept money from a man who knows noting of our values of irishmen amd women.

Again the pope visiting ireland,well last time i checked we are a catholic dominated country, lots and lots of people believe and confide in the pope who are we to tell them otherwise?

listermint

TheFatHombre wrote: »

Again im speaking in facts here, open society has already given repeal €250,000 toward there campaign this is a stated fact its why I want answer to why we accept money from a man who knows noting of our values of irishmen amd women.

Again the pope visiting ireland,well last time i checked we are a catholic dominated country, lots and lots of people believe and confide in the pope who are we to tell them otherwise?

I stopped reading after this snippet here.

This thread is not really worthwhile is it, in a world of repeal threads over several forums.

david75

So you’re ok with the Pope actually turning up totes impose his influence on people (which it really won’t in all reality) but not with campaigns receiving funds from Soros.

Huge disconnect there.

TheFatHombre

listermint wrote: »

I stopped reading after this snippet here.

This thread is not really worthwhile is it, in a world of repeal threads over several forums.

Well the thread is of value cause everyone wants to have a fair debate on this topic and its kind of diffucult to when theres outsiders like mr soros pumping billions to get a win on abortion. Heres a quote from an article released by open society

"With one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the world, a win there could impact other strongly Catholic countries in Europe, such as Poland, and provide much needed proof that change is possible, even in highly conservative places.

"The recent legalisation of same-sex marriage offers valuable and timely opportunities to advance the campaign."

So now you can see that there is infact an agenda been pushed by the radical left to push radical idealogys onto to ireland and western culture in general.

Arthur Daley

TheFatHombre wrote: »

My views are redundant and so are the views of every irishman/woman if were allowing an agenda to be pushed from mr soros and his cronies at the EU, what credibilty does democracy even have anymore?, like i said in my original post why is this not been flaged up, one donor pumping billions into abortion campaigns around europe and if its not for the safety of the mother/baby then whats the real reason?

Soros, through open society is working hard to reverse Brexit. So he/they got a lot of attention from all the Brexiteers and press in the Telegraph etc. in recent weeks. Of course the British still remember him well from his attack on STG in 1992.

TheFatHombre

david75 wrote: »

So you’re ok with the Pope actually turning up totes impose his influence on people (which it really won’t in all reality) but not with campaigns receiving funds from Soros.

Huge disconnect there.

The pope visited here before millions attended to see him, everyone smiled laughed and enjoyed the day that was in it. I have no issue with the pope visiting a catholic country, I take issue with billionaires influencing our democratic political system? I wonder how much the eurocrat varadkar was paid by George soros to turn a blind eye to this worrying issue

listermint

TheFatHombre wrote: »

The pope visited here before millions attended to see him, everyone smiled laughed and enjoyed the day that was in it. I have no issue with the pope visiting a catholic country, I take issue with billionaires influencing our democratic political system? I wonder how much the eurocrat varadkar was paid by George soros to turn a blind eye to this worrying issue

This is'nt a debate then because you don't see the hypocrisy in your argument....

TheFatHombre

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Soros, through open society is working hard to reverse Brexit. So he/they got a lot of attention from all the Brexiteers and press in the Telegraph etc. in recent weeks. Of course the British still remember him well from his attack on STG in 1992.

And why do you think an old man like george soros would want to reverse brexit? Maybe its because his for open borders, erosion of national identity, endless immigration of which is not screened. Like i said a radically left idealogy? Im not familiar with STG 92 care to elighthen?

TheFatHombre

listermint wrote: »

This is'nt a debate then because you don't see the hypocrisy in your argument....

Im not arguing with anybody sir, im simply flabbergasted to how not one media outlet in this country is whilling to report on george soros and his nefarious agenda throughout europe. Whats an 86 year old still doing funding abortion groups anyway? Surely if your 86 and a billionaire you would live out the remainder of your days living good, instead his shaping social and cultural politics right across europe very very strange

Arthur Daley

TheFatHombre wrote: »

And why do you think an old man like george soros would want to reverse brexit? Maybe its because his for open borders, erosion of national identity, endless immigration of which is not screened. Like i said a radically left idealogy? Im not familiar with STG 92 care to elighthen?

Soros is known as the 'man who broke the Bank of England' from 'Black Wednesday' in Sept. 1992. He made a billion pounds speculating on STG having to leave the Exchange Rate Mechanism ERM, which was a convergence of currencies before the Euro. So he has had a noteriety in Britian for more than 25 years. Especially with the 'save the pound'/leave campaigns.

TheFatHombre

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Soros is known as the 'man who broke the Bank of England' from 'Black Wednesday' in Sept. 1992. He made a billion pounds speculating on STG having to leave the Exchange Rate Mechanism ERM, which was a convergence of currencies before the Euro. So he has had a noteriety in Britian for more than 25 years. Especially with the leave campaign.

This i did not no thanks for that information, I recently heard an argument between nigel farage and those at an EU round table discussion, farage had some pretty good points about george soros and his subvert policies around europe?, Im wondering what your thoughts on farage are? And how is he perceived in england?, Im completely persuming your english

Doctor Jimbob

TheFatHombre wrote: »

Im not arguing with anybody sir, im simply flabbergasted to how not one media outlet in this country is whilling to report on george soros and his nefarious agenda throughout europe. Whats an 86 year old still doing funding abortion groups anyway? Surely if your 86 and a billionaire you would live out the remainder of your days living good, instead his shaping social and cultural politics right across europe very very strange

You're complaining about an old man having an influence on foreign affairs while defending another old man doing the same. You really can't see the double standard you're displaying here?

listermint

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

You're complaining about an old man having an influence on foreign affairs while defending another old man doing the same. You really can't see the double standard you're displaying here?

Id gauge its because , 'its his old man' therefore it does not really matter what that interference is.

Arthur Daley

TheFatHombre wrote: »

This i did not no thanks for that information, I recently heard an argument between nigel farage and those at an EU round table discussion, farage had some pretty good points about george soros and his subvert policies around europe?, Im wondering what your thoughts on farage are? And how is he perceived in england?, Im completely persuming your english

Farage has his points, and huge personal support in Britain, but he obviously winds up Irish people, because politics here is ovetwhelmingly pro EU. It is thrown at Farage that he is supported by Aaron Banks, so you cannot get away from arguements over funding for big political campaigns.

Some probably think Soros runs the EU project. Not sure about that, but neither do I believe the influence of the man should go unreported or unchallenged by journalsts. He is supposed to have gifted circa €16bn to open society, so that buys a lot of clout, and we should all question how are lives are being influenced by big money players influencing big politics.

TheFatHombre

Indeed you hit the nail on the head

Experience_day

I think everyone regardless of their position on the 8th amendment should be wary of undue external influence.

Because money evidently influences and it won't always be in "your" interest.

VinLieger

TheFatHombre wrote: »

Im not arguing with anybody sir, im simply flabbergasted to how not one media outlet in this country is whilling to report on george soros and his nefarious agenda throughout europe. Whats an 86 year old still doing funding abortion groups anyway? Surely if your 86 and a billionaire you would live out the remainder of your days living good, instead his shaping social and cultural politics right across europe very very strange

But you've no problem with pro life groups receiving funding from the US? Again the likes of youth defense and iona et al consistently refuse to allow their books to be inspected or declare where their donations come from.

Calling out one side but not the other because you agree with them is the definition of being a hypocrite

Triangle

markodaly wrote: »

But they did as they are SIPO compliant are they not?

Broadsheet.ie did a piece on it yesterday that was pretty damming on Amnesty Ireland and Colm o'Gorman.

Basically Colm O'Gorman is using weasel words to state that they are above the law. You can listen back to this piece of comedy gold on rte.ie with Sean O'Rourke.



Classic!

Amnesty International Ireland was an organisation to which I had in the past given up my time and money in helping them campaign in releasing prisoners in autocratic regimes, as well as prisoners of conscience. However, since o'Gorman took over it has basically stuck its nose into Irish domestic politics pontificating to the plebs what is morally right or wrong, hence why I have not given them a red cent in years. Maybe this is why they need the cash from Soros, Irish people are sick of their pontificating so they use American money as a substitute for Irish led donations.

No matter if its Russian, American, Chinese, Saudi, outer Mongolian or whomever, foreign money to achieve political outcomes should be 100% illegal in Ireland.

Just reading this now and the irony is outstanding. You support an organisation that fights other countries in moral issues, but when they don't have the same morals as yourself in your home country they get labelled.
That's absolutely fantastic! Did you ever stop to think how the people in the countries where they 'stuck their noses in' felt?

demfad

One of the anti-repeal campaigns is using Pinto. This is a company run by Borthwich formerly of Cambridge Analytica. He worked on the official leave campaigns. Pinto and Cambridge Analytica is one of 30 companies being investigated by the British electoral commision for breaking laws including foreign donations and campiagns cooperating.

Cambridge analytica is owned by Robert Mercer the fascist leaning billionaire behind Trump who also owns Breitbart news. Steve Bannon was VP until he took charge of Trump's campaign.
Cambridge is also under investigation in Trump_Russia for coordinating with Russian intelligence to get Trump elected. Farage is friends with Bannon and Mercer.

Whatever your view on the 8th I hope people would agree that it is a matter of national security to keep the likes of cambridge Analytica, Mercers, Bannon OUT of domestic Irish affairs. The weekend news of wide ranging covert Russian operations in this state is also deeply disturbing.

markodaly

Triangle wrote: »

Just reading this now and the irony is outstanding. You support an organisation that fights other countries in moral issues, but when they don't have the same morals as yourself in your home country they get labelled.
That's absolutely fantastic! Did you ever stop to think how the people in the countries where they 'stuck their noses in' felt?

I do not support outside influence of the Irish electoral process. Do you?

These other countries you speak off, the people rarely if ever get a say as they are run by ruthless thugs.

James Brown

Can anyone name another outside influence which held and holds greater sway over the state than the Catholic Church?
Talk about nefarious. You'll literally burn in hell if you disagree with this odd often immoral organisation.

Newspapers have always held a bias. The first newspapers were by appointment of the royal of the day. In this Trump era people point these things out like it's lies being uncovered.
Abortion is a touchy subject. Calling out bias from the other side be you for freedom of choice regarding your own body or anti-choice, proves nothing as regards the weight of your argument.

People should have control over their own body in my view. Religious or not if you don't want abortions, don't have one.

demfad

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Can anyone name another outside influence which held and holds greater sway over the state than the Catholic Church?
Talk about nefarious. You'll literally burn in hell if you disagree with this odd often immoral organisation.

Newspapers have always held a bias. The first newspapers were by appointment of the royal of the day. In this Trump era people point these things out like it's lies being uncovered.
Abortion is a touchy subject. Calling out bias from the other side be you for freedom of choice regarding your own body or anti-choice, proves nothing as regards the weight of your argument.

People should have control over their own body in my view. Religious or not if you don't want abortions, don't have one.

Yes. The Catholic church like it's evangelical cousins is basically an authoritarian institution. They want their beliefs to apply to everyone in the State whether individuals like it or not. The ban on choice for pregnant women needs to be seen in the light of the ban on condoms, the ban on homosexuality etc.
People need to consider if they really believe that abortion is wrong, or is this what has been instilled in them since childhood via the church.
Also if you believe abortion is wrong do you believe that everyone in the state should be forced to believe as you do, or should they not be free to have their own beliefs?

Moonmumbler

angiogoir wrote: »

As to pro-life groups getting funds from abroad, they do, but it appears to pale in comparison to the huge sums sent by wealthy Americans to the pro-choice side, and in earlier referendum campaigns, too.

That is simply not true. The overall funding for the anti-abortion side amounts to much more. What you often see with funding for the pro-choice side is not always for campaigns but for information and assistance regarding crisis pregnancies.

Samaris

Moonmumbler wrote: »

That is simply not true. The overall funding for the anti-abortion side amounts to much more. What you often see with funding for the pro-choice side is not always for campaigns but for information and assistance regarding crisis pregnancies.

Are you suggesting that they are campaigning by information for crisis pregnancies?

If not, why are you conflating donations towards day-to-day work of individual groups with donations towards a political issue?

end of the road

demfad wrote: »

Yes. The Catholic church like it's evangelical cousins is basically an authoritarian institution. They want their beliefs to apply to everyone in the State whether individuals like it or not. The ban on choice for pregnant women needs to be seen in the light of the ban on condoms, the ban on homosexuality etc.
People need to consider if they really believe that abortion is wrong, or is this what has been instilled in them since childhood via the church.
Also if you believe abortion is wrong do you believe that everyone in the state should be forced to believe as you do, or should they not be free to have their own beliefs?

i will answer.
anyone can believe what they like. however when acting on that belief causes undue harm to others especially when they cannot defend themselves then those beliefs must be prohibited via the law from being acted on, as is effectively being done in this case (even if some are traveling over seas to get around it)
many of us who are against abortion actually changed our mind to such a view based on the arguments stacking up whereas the argument we supported originally began to not stack up when put to the test. the catholic church had nothing to do with it, many of us aren't even religious. i and i'm sure many others on the pro-life side voted yes to ssm and don't care about contraception because we use it (yes that's right, we are ordinary people just like you)
there is no bann on choice for pregnant women and if you want to have a go at the catholic church then there are plenty of reasons but they aren't relevant to this debate and non-catholics should not be used to have a go at the catholic church just because we disagree with the pro-choice view.
i think that to debate this further then the other thread here may be more suitable?

demfad

end of the road wrote: »

i will answer.
anyone can believe what they like. however when acting on that belief causes undue harm to others especially when they cannot defend themselves then those beliefs must be prohibited via the law from being acted on, as is effectively being done in this case (even if some are traveling over seas to get around it)
many of us who are against abortion actually changed our mind to such a view based on the arguments stacking up whereas the argument we supported originally began to not stack up when put to the test. the catholic church had nothing to do with it, many of us aren't even religious. i and i'm sure many others on the pro-life side voted yes to ssm and don't care about contraception because we use it (yes that's right, we are ordinary people just like you)
there is no bann on choice for pregnant women and if you want to have a go at the catholic church then there are plenty of reasons but they aren't relevant to this debate and non-catholics should not be used to have a go at the catholic church just because we disagree with the pro-choice view.
i think that to debate this further then the other thread here may be more suitable?

Catholic doctrine is brainwashed from a young age. People who no longer practice cannot claim their core beliefs were not shaped by the Catholic doctrine. The possibility of the preponderance of Catholic views from those with Catholic upbringings is mainly influenced by anything other than that upbringing is statistically negligable.

The authoritarian nature of the Catholic church and thus the fundamentalist beliefs of its adherents is relavent. One pro-life group has hired Pinto which uses psycographic manipulation of people through social media and the techniques of Cambridge Analytica. An electronic version of what the Catholic church has being doing to children for centuries, if you will.

CA is being investigated for manipulating the US election with Russian coordiantion. It is also being investigated with Brexit. Any campaigns that CA is involved with also involve covert help from billionaire Robert Mercer.

THis Mercer/Russia alliance uses vast networks designed to control discourse on social media, to inflame RW viewpoints and sow doubt amongst others.

They are anti-LGBT, anti-SSM, anti-science, anti-women, anti everything but rich white men.
This is the money behind the pro 'life' campaign and their beliefs.

david75

So it looks like save the 8th are having their ads paid for directly from the US and thus loopholing Irish /SIPO Regulations. this is alarming given this weeks revelations about Cambridge analytica running trumps campaign and pushing brexit. An offshoot of that company has been hired by the pro life campaign here.
Foreign interference ahoy.

https://twitter.com/dwyercraig/status/976370487663235073?s=21

demfad

david75 wrote: »

So it looks like save the 8th are having their ads paid for directly from the US and thus loopholing Irish /SIPO Regulations. this is alarming given this weeks revelations about Cambridge analytica running trumps campaign and pushing brexit. An offshoot of that company has been hired by the pro life campaign here.
Foreign interference ahoy.

https://twitter.com/dwyercraig/status/976370487663235073?s=21

Former Cambridge Analytica employee Thomas Bortwick is CEO of Kanto will head the operation. But like CA, Kanto is a shell company with no assets and few employees. There are several like this including Emerdata set up last month whose directors are Alex Nix and Rebekah Mercer of CA and her sister Jennifer.
These are all fronts for the same active measures operation: A far right syndicate involvining the Mercers and Steve Bannon and helped by Russian active measures.
And I wish this was a conspiracy theory.

recedite

I see Colm O'Gorman is now trying to "have his cake and eat it" by registering with Sipo as a "third party" to allow political campaigning, while still refusing to comply with the restrictions on donations applicable for third parties.

O'Gorman wrote:

“A campaign that targets the electorate is a campaign that involves elections and campaigns and we absolutely recognise that rules and regulations can be put in place by the State and we’ve no difficulty in complying with them.”
Amnesty, which has refused to return the money, has received permission to challenge the order by Mr Justice Seamus Noonan. The case is expected to be heard later this month.
Separately, Amnesty has registered with Sipo as a third party, which means it can use donations for campaign purposes. Organisations that aren’t political parties but who receive donations of more than €100 for political purposes must register with the watchdog.

As a third party he cannot accept any foreign donations, or any donation from an Irish corporate donor of more than €200.http://www.sipo.ie/en/guidelines/explanatory-notes/explanatory-notes-for-third-parties/explanatory-note-for-third-parties.pdf

Also his claim that the €137,000 George Soros donation was spent before today's official launch of the campaign is irrelevant. The Sipo legislation does not take into account when or what the money was spent on. It is concerned with the donation received, and the intent of the donor.

It also seems that Sipo have evidence proving the intent of the donor, despite both Soros and O'Gorman conspiring to hide the true purpose of the money.

Catherine Sanz and Michael Cogley, the Times Ireland edition, reported:

The OSF (Open Society Foundation) contradicted a statement issued by Sipo last Wednesday claiming that Sipo had received written confirmation from the donor that the funding was explicitly for political purposes. Sherry Perreault, head of ethics and lobbying at Sipo, said there had been “a bit of wordsmithing” from the OSF on the matter and that Sipo had verified documents relating to the donation.
“There was documentary evidence received by the commission which was verified by the donor,” she said. “By virtue of verifying this information, the donor essentially clarified the intent.”

Anyway, as Sipo make clear..

Sipo wrote:

Third Parties must register with the Standards Commission. The definition of political purposes is extremely wide and, as well as referring to elections and referenda, it also covers any campaign which supports or opposes any policy of the Government or a public authority, including a local authority

Maybe Amnesty Ireland's lawyers are intending to drag out a legal challenge until (a) the referendum is over and (b) the money is all gone cannot be returned to Soros.
In which case its a sad, cynical and dishonest tactic.