Declan Ganley on Prime Time ...

DerKaiser said:
I've seen the point made elsewhere that 160 TDs called for a yes in Lisbon and this chancer called for a no. Who did we trust?
Click to expand...
i thinlk thats why the NO side won.....One chancer called for a no..160 chancers called for a YES
 
ontour said:
Do you think that we would have voted No to Lisbon if Libertas/ Ganley had not been involved?
Click to expand...
I would have. Nice 1 was defeated sans Ganley. Many people voted No to Lisbon despite, rather than because of, various elements within the No camp.
 
michaelm said:
I would have. Nice 1 was defeated sans Ganley. Many people voted No to Lisbon despite, rather than because of, various elements within the No camp.
Click to expand...

I second that. Ganley would almost make me vote yes, almost!

Ruam
 
Couldn't agree more, what in the heck was the point of it, if it was to discredit him it certainly didn't try hard enough and why anyway? Waste of taxpayers' money

A friend of mine in Wexford told me the local Borough Council had a civic reception for Dick Roche a couple of years ago - because he was BORN in Wexford, love to know the cost of it and why oh why ? Though he says all you have to do is pass your leaving and you get a civic reception by them. What a joke.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
michaelm said:
I would have. Nice 1 was defeated sans Ganley. Many people voted No to Lisbon despite, rather than because of, various elements within the No camp.
Click to expand...

So, to make sure I understand your answer, you think that the country would have rejected Lisbon if Ganley had never got involved?

There will always be two sides to every debate but I strongly believe that Lisbon would have been carried if not for Ganley/ Libertas.
 
ontour said:
So, to make sure I understand your answer, you think that the country would have rejected Lisbon if Ganley had never got involved?
Click to expand...
For clarity; I think it would have been very very close but may have just been rejected. Remember circa 530,000 people voted against both Nice 1 & Nice 2. Many people feel that the 'pooling' of soveignty has gone far enough.
ontour said:
There will always be two sides to every debate but I strongly believe that Lisbon would have been carried if not for Ganley/ Libertas.
Click to expand...
Who can say. But that's the game plan. A bit of revisionism, convine people that No = Ganley, Ganley = Evil, Lisbon 2 = Yes or No to EU. Overturning the Lisbon result will be bad for Ireland and bad for the EU. They want a federal state, they should be honest and ask the people of each country to decide if they want to be part of a federal state.
 
Ganley is a breath of different air in Irish politics. I'm not sure whether the air is clean or not but until proven otherwise I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. None of the existing parties offer solid direction or actually clean up public service properly. God knows we need a Maggie Thatcher here to sort out the public service unions, levels of waste and forge on. I'm not advocating all her policies but she made some positive contributions too. I'm hoping Libertas become a real alternative - I'd even bother to put myself on the electoral roll just to vote for CHANGE.
 

That is the very reason why I voted against Lisbon, not because of Ganley though if anything, that sham Primetime has copperfastened my views on the undemocratic Lisbon Treaty.
 
Sherman said:
Oh, the hilarity of a Fianna Fail government attacking a politician for dodgy associations and untraced sources of funding.
Click to expand...

The media and a lot of Government politicians seem to be putting a lot of emphasis on his sources of funding. Why should Libertas receive more scrutiny than any other political party? As we've seen from the Tribunals, there have been a lot of substantial donations made to parties and individuals running for office which have not been scutinised and certainly were never declared to the public in the manner in which they want Libertas funding declared.

There appears to be a pan-media campaign against Libertas for some reason and the strength, consistency and proportionality of it suggests that the media have some hidden agenda and are not interested in fair coverage. It certainly smacks of media manipulation of public opinion.

On the Lisbon Treaty, the vast majority of people who voted No did not do so due to Libertas, Sinn Fein or any of the cranks. In many cases, they did so in spite of these people. The Government seem to be taking a view that the No vote was due to these people - hence the trotting out of them at the post referendum post mortum. I feel that there is a deliberate effort being made by them to associate No voters with crank groups and shame these No voters into switching sides.
 
Coolaboy said:
You could tell he was lying through his teeth.
Click to expand...

Who - Ganley or the producers of the programme?

It was a lazy piece of journalism. The crew flew to places like Latvia, Albania, Washington DC, etc. Nothing new was discovered. A clumsy attempt was made to link Ganley with the Albanian pyramid selling scheme, shadowy murders, dodgy contracts.

Pure mudslinging. Waste of license fee money.
 
Like many other pople, I feel that I have to state from the outset that I am not a supporter of Declan Ganley's politics (in so far as I can discern what those politics are). However I could only look in wonder at RTE in full flight on a hatchet job on the man.
The most interesting thing, for me, was the way that RTE tried to paint Ganley as a sinister individual; the programme was one of the most one-sided pieces thay have done, ever, and there was no attempt at even-handedness. The premise of the programme was that they had made their minds up to rubbish the guy, and then they put little pieces together to support their view. No attempt at balance whatsoever.
What nobody seems to have queried though is why they did it. To me, it seems as though the government asked them to bury the man, and they tried, albeit in a very hamfisted manner. Why did they disagree with almost everything Ganley said and not take Dick Roche up on his own comments? After all, anyone in Dick Roche's party, particularly in his era, has been associated with some very unsavoury characters indeed. That was a question begging to be asked, but nobody asked it.
 

Good post. I felt the same watching it, full of vague insinuations and lacking in any facts. How they spoke of his link to the "neo-cons" was telling - I am aware links to the US republican party might be a crime in Montrose but it's hardly the stuff of major scandal.

The comments surrounding the bid for the Irish mobile phone license were crazy. Some Irish Times head stating they couldn't get full disclosure of all Ganley's financial dealings at the time. Meanwhile on-screen we see a smiling Denis O'Brien - did the same Irish Times journalist try asking O'Brien for a full and frank disclosure of all his financial wheeling and dealing?

I dislike Declan Ganley and argued strongly that we should vote for the Lisbon Treaty but I've half a mind to submit a complaint to the broadcasting standards authority about this obvious hatchet job.
 

Someone should. If Primetime spent as much time "investigating" why the government aren't searching the Extraordinary Rendition flights through Shannon, the world would be a better place. Maybe they too have been got to by the....the...the..Neo-cons !
 

What he said.
 

More license money is going to be lost now as Declan Ganley is now going to sue RTE as a result of the Prime Time Programme.
 
Megan said:
More license money is going to be lost now as Declan Ganley is now going to sue RTE as a result of the Prime Time Programme.
Click to expand...

Prime Time was disappointing as it did not illuminate anything new about the guy.
 
Just watched the show in full and I have to say that I felt a deep misgiving as to the innuendo aired. It was a pure example of hatchet journalism and one would have to ask just who was behind such a one-sided attack on Ganley.

I didn't vote on Lisbon as I was abroad at the time of the referendum but I'd probably have voted 'No'.

The content of the programme unnerves me greatly since it would appear to be an attempt by some parties to discredit Ganley in the run-up to a forced second vote. RTE should be utterly ashamed of itself in allowing it's network to be so blatantly prostituted by government-aligned interests. But I guess that to expect it to do otherwise would be like asking the dog to bite the hand that feeds it.
 
Megan said:
More license money is going to be lost now as Declan Ganley is now going to sue RTE as a result of the Prime Time Programme.
Click to expand...

That would be a good thing because the money would be used for the NO campaign and it would be RTE paying for it
 
I hope they keep Dick Roche heavily to the front of the Yes Campaign. If ever there was an oily individual designed to put people off, he is himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register