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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Declan Ganley - Prime Time special

2

Comments

  • #52
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    Declan Ganley is traitor of Ireland and Europe. There have been allegations that he accepted money from dirty hands of foreign secret services not that long ago. If that's true, he should be jailed for life.

    Hang on there, we cant go making those kind of claims without something to back them up.


  • #53
    nesf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    Hang on there, we cant go making those kind of claims without something to back them up.

    I've already asked him/her for a source. If they don't come back with one within a day, I'll delete the post and all references to it. If after that they come back with a source then I'll undelete them.


  • #54
    WooPeeA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,136 ✭✭✭WooPeeA


    nesf wrote: »
    Source, please.
    EU Parliament website:
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/expert/infopress_page/008-37657-266-09-39-901-20080919IPR37656-22-09-2008-2008-false/default_en.htm

    Few articles from Irish Times:
    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/0923/1222105125507.html

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/0919/1221773888299.html


    An article from "The Economist"
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/certainideasofeurope/2008/09/us_military_ties_to_the_lisbon.cfm


    Times Online:
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4837672.ece



    Keep your eyes open for more.


  • #55
    Eurosceptic2008
    Closed Accounts Posts: 81 ✭✭Eurosceptic2008


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    Declan Ganley is traitor of Ireland and Europe. There have been allegations that he accepted money from dirty hands of foreign secret services not that long ago. I was watching this case very carefully.. If that's true, he should be jailed for life.

    There has been zero evidence to back up those CIA etc. claims. They are lies and you should be aware of our libel laws. The real traitors are those who want to hand over the governance of Ireland to Brussels without a mandate to do so from the people.


  • #56
    WooPeeA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,136 ✭✭✭WooPeeA


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    Hang on there, we cant go making those kind of claims without something to back them up.
    I said "he was suspected of..", not "he was guilty of". Big difference.


  • #57
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Now all the people claiming this was a character assassination have to demonstrate is that there was a conscious decision to selectively present facts in a way that deliberately created a negative impression.

    Have you not read any of the previous posts?

    - only focusing on negative details
    - trying very hard to dig up dirt
    - ominous music throughout the show
    - silent end credits

    I'm finding it hard to think of any positive things they said about the man.

    You'd have to be blind and deaf to not see the entire show was aimed at creating a negative impression of the man. Luckily most of the Irish public are smart enough to see through this sort of nonsense.


  • #58
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    I said "he was suspected of..", not "he was guilty of". Big difference.

    Yes, the difference is innocent and guilty.

    Someone could say AARRRGH was suspected of x, y and z. That rubbish means nothing without proof or evidence.

    Until I see hard evidence that the man is corrupt or working for the CIA or whatever, he is innocent in my eyes. I hope all the people saying terrible things about him never get accused of something they didn't do. It's not nice.


  • #59
    copacetic
    Subscribers Posts: 16,592 ✭✭✭✭copacetic


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    Have you not read any of the previous posts?

    - only focusing on negative details
    - trying very hard to dig up dirt
    - ominous music throughout the show
    - silent end credits

    I'm finding it hard to think of any positive things they said about the man.

    You'd have to be blind and deaf to not see the entire show was aimed at creating a negative impression of the man. Luckily most of the Irish public are smart enough to see through this sort of nonsense.


    so let me get this straight. The did a story on potentially worrying issues, but in doing so they should have focused on the positive details, tried less hard to do their jobs, played cheerful music throughout show and during the credits?

    You do know they were not making an ad for him?


  • #60
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    copacetic wrote: »
    so let me get this straight. The did a story on potentially worrying issues, but in doing so they should have focused on the positive details, tried less hard to do their jobs, played cheerful music throughout show and during the credits?

    You do know they were not making an ad for him?

    As the state broadcaster who has an obligation to be impartial, they should have told a balanced story.

    I would have no problem with the show if it was by TV3 or whatever (they can do what they like) but RTE, as a Government owned organisation, need to be honest and fair.

    Are they going to have a second show where they travel around the world trying to find people who say nice things about him, and looking for the good deeds he has done? Of course not.

    It was a show of nonsense half-allegations with scary music in the background. It was pathetic.

    What is even more retarded is they managed to dig up NO proveable dirt on the man, even though they were clearly trying as hard as they can.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    WooPeeA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,136 ✭✭✭WooPeeA


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    Yes, the difference is innocent and guilty.

    Someone could say AARRRGH was suspected of x, y and z. That rubbish means nothing without proof or evidence.
    Of course it's nothing more but just a suspicious.. Very serious one.

    I wonder why Libertas still haven't revealed second part of founding sources.. it takes so long.. :cool:

    ---

    Have you heard? Now they applied to EU for extra funds for their new political campaign! What a impudence..
    Double agents of what?
    :cool:


  • #62
    nesf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    WooPeeA wrote: »
    I said "he was suspected of..", not "he was guilty of". Big difference.

    I've changed the wording of your posts and quotes of it. The change was "he was suspected of" to "There have been allegations that he". It's clearer and less likely to offend without changing the meaning or general thrust of your post. You need, in cases like this, to accurately state what the case is. "Suspected of" means nothing and everything and could be anything as serious as an ongoing criminal investigation to as inane as some guy in the pub thinks it.

    I hope you don't mind but I think it's a fair change and is neutral enough in wording that people on both sides of this can't have much issue with it. In future if you're going to make a claim like that reference it in the original post please.


  • #63
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    - only focusing on negative details
    Untrue.
    - trying very hard to dig up dirt
    What? They set out to find out what they could about his background. As they found contradictions between his accounts and those of others, they investigated further. Why is this a problem?
    - ominous music throughout the show
    "Ominous"? I honestly can't even remember what the background music sounded like.
    - silent end credits
    Now you're really reaching.
    I'm finding it hard to think of any positive things they said about the man.
    There were several people interviewed who said lots of positive things about him. Were you watching the same show I was?
    You'd have to be blind and deaf to not see the entire show was aimed at creating a negative impression of the man. Luckily most of the Irish public are smart enough to see through this sort of nonsense.
    Ah, yet another unelected spokesman for "most of the Irish public."


  • #64
    copacetic
    Subscribers Posts: 16,592 ✭✭✭✭copacetic


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    As the state broadcaster who has an obligation to be impartial, they should have told a balanced story.

    I would have no problem with the show if it was by TV3 or whatever (they can do what they like) but RTE, as a Government owned organisation, need to be honest and fair.

    Are they going to have a second show where they travel around the world trying to find people who say nice things about him, and looking for the good deeds he has done? Of course not.

    It was a show of nonsense half-allegations with scary music in the background. It was pathetic.

    What is even more retarded is they managed to dig up NO proveable dirt on the man, even though they were clearly trying as hard as they can.


    didn't they have him on and give him plenty of time to make his case? This was the most damning thing in fact, hearing him trying to obscure the questions raised.

    I'm not sure where you get the idea that TV3 can do what they like, or that there is some kind of 50% rule in news reporting. I presume you are getting mixed up with election coverage.

    All any news organisation has to do is be correct and offer the right to reply and give your side of the story. You appear to believe that they have to say one good thing about you for every bad thing? That's ludicrous.


  • #65
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    I think the some of the "yes" vote people are living in denial about this programme. If it was about another topic/someone else, you'd be able to see how one sided and negative the show was. I guess politics hazes things somewhat. :)

    I'm neither a "yes" freak nor a "no" freak. If anything I think Libertas are a bit of a joke. I'm just some randomer who saw prime time by accident.


  • #66
    copacetic
    Subscribers Posts: 16,592 ✭✭✭✭copacetic


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    I think the some of the "yes" vote people are living in denial about this programme. If it was about another topic/someone else, you'd be able to see how one sided and negative the show was. I guess politics hazes things somewhat. :)

    I'm neither a "yes" freak nor a "no" freak. If anything I think Libertas are a bit of a joke. I'm just some randomer who saw prime time by accident.

    I'm not a 'yes' side person myself. In general I'd avoid the politics forum to keep away from the 'freaks' you describe. However I'd most certainly be anti Ganley, the same way I'd be 'anti' being on the same side as all the far right British MEPs who celebrated our no vote.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    I'm enjoying the sight of people gripping at straws when they are talking about the ominous music the grainy images etc in the prime time show. There doesn't seem to be much argument over the facts presented though. The Negative far outweighs the positive, that's not RTE's fault that's just the facts.

    It is interesting to see his supporters though, defending his lies about his participation as an adviser to the Lithuanian government, as bumping up his CV.

    Read his speeches, he sounds like a county councillor from Killinaskully.
    The media in Ireland seem to regard success in business as some some sort of benchmark of intelligence, experience tells me this is more often then not untrue. The conspiracy theories give too much credence to how smart he actually is imo.

    He's a man cub, telecomms business man who believes he can buy public opinion to further his own business interests. His mandate is a badly thought out half baked notion of some sort of federal European super-state with an elected president and an onus to spread this particular brand of freedom and democracy throughout the world. Ye-haw!!

    If it was 50 years ago the man would be a christian missionary Africa trying to convert black babies to the Catholic Church. And we wouldn't need to be looking at his ridiculous delusional piety and self importance on the idiot box.


  • #68
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    studiorat wrote: »
    There doesn't seem to be much argument over the facts presented though. The Negative far outweighs the positive, that's not RTE's fault that's just the facts.

    What facts? All I saw were empty accusations!

    studiorat wrote: »
    It is interesting to see his supporters though, defending his lies about his participation as an adviser to the Lithuanian government, as bumping up his CV.

    Yes, it seems he exaggerated a job he used to do. I ask you this: who hasn't done that? Is your CV 100% truthful? Have you exaggerated anything? Of course you have. But does that make you dodgy? Of course it doesn't.

    studiorat wrote: »
    The media in Ireland seem to regard success in business as some some sort of benchmark of intelligence, experience tells me this is more often then not untrue. The conspiracy theories give too much credence to how smart he actually is imo.

    No, business success generally means competence. Most people could not do what he's done. There is no doubt he is a very motivated, competent, hard working person. I do happen to think he is smart.

    studiorat wrote: »
    He's a man cub, telecomms business man who believes he can buy public opinion to further his own business interests.

    EVERY politician or political body exists to pursue their own interests. Seriously, your weak cheap shots could be fired at anyone.

    studiorat wrote: »
    If it was 50 years ago the man would be a christian missionary Africa trying to convert black babies to the Catholic Church. And we wouldn't need to be looking at his ridiculous delusional piety and self importance on the idiot box.

    Yawn.

    This is pathetic.

    Just be fair on the man. I think Libertas are a bit of a joke but I am yet to see any facts which prove the man is dodgy or guilty. So far I only have ridiculous, empty allegations and scary music.

    I repeat: I am defending him because I think people are being unfair and dishonest about him. I couldn't give a fiddle about Libertas.


  • #69
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    What facts? All I saw were empty accusations!

    How long was the program?
    How were the accusations empty? Are you saying he wasn't involved in these schemes. He didn't have Liam Lawlor working for him? He wasn't working with shaw?

    Apart from the music was there anything in the show that you thought was in error?

    RTE I'm afraid have to make programs for the general public, to go into real detail in any of his business affairs would make the program too long and too complicated for general TV audiences. At the end of the day iit still has to keep you watching the bits between the adverts.
    AARRRGH wrote: »
    Yes, it seems he exaggerated a job he used to do. I ask you this: who hasn't done that? Is your CV 100% truthful? Have you exaggerated anything? Of course you have. But does that make you dodgy? Of course it doesn't.

    Actually at this stage I don't really need to. And yes my CV is 100% fact and truthful it has to be backed up in word and deed you see. But then again I don't have my own political lobby group running from my company offices so I guess I might not need to pad it out like he does.
    AARRRGH wrote: »
    No, business success generally means competence. Most people could not do what he's done. There is no doubt he is a very motivated, competent, hard working person. I do happen to think he is smart.

    George Bush is motivated, hard working etc. Don't forget he's had a few dogs in there too.



    [/QUOTE]
    EVERY politician or political body exists to pursue their own interests. Seriously, your weak cheap shots could be fired at anyone.[/QUOTE]

    Firstly he's not a politician it's a privately owned and run political action group run from his company offices. Ganley's business dealings and the example of the people he has shat on have done nothing but prove that he is purely working for his own personal interests.

    The difference is politicians and political bodies own interests usually have the voters in mind. Ganleys interests are business interests for him and his cronies, anti-abortion activists and all the rest of the far right religious crowd.


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    I repeat: I am defending him because I think people are being unfair and dishonest about him. I couldn't give a fiddle about Libertas.

    Where exactly do you think people are being infair and dishonest about him? What topics exactly?

    If there was and dishonesty in the show don't you think there'd be lawsuits flying around at this stage?
    You are wasting your time so. Really, there's a lot more to him than what they could fit into prime-time let alone his business partners.


  • #70
    Dave!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,857 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    I haven't seen it, but Ganley was on the radio yesterday and said that his (young) nephew was watching the show and apparantly asked why are they playing monster music? :D

    Sounds rather disgusting to be honest. It's disturbing that the state broadcaster might engage in this kind of thing.

    Reminds me of John McCain's "Who is Barrack Obama?" crap...


  • #71
    J.S. Pill
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭J.S. Pill


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Untrue. What? They set out to find out what they could about his background....yet another unelected spokesman for "most of the Irish public."

    oscarBravo, with respect, I think we all are aware of your pro Lisbon leanings at this stage but I don't see how you can maintain such a strong and uncompromising defence of this programme. Can you honestly tell me that sinister music, camera zooms on Ganley and the silent credits did not have then intention of amplifying the sinsiter portrait they were constructing? And then there was the very underhanded guilt by association ploy towards the end of the program (the homophobes and climate change deniers). We can all reserve judgement on the substantive issues raised for the moment but can you at least consider this as a thrashy peice of journalism if nothing else?


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    J.S. Pill
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭J.S. Pill


    studiorat wrote: »
    I'm enjoying the sight of people gripping at straws when they are talking about the ominous music the grainy images etc in the prime time show. There doesn't seem to be much argument over the facts presented though..

    I'm reserving judgement on the substantive issues raised (or at least the ones I consider to be at all relevant) but I don't think its fair to say that we're clutching at straws. Again, this is very much relevant the issue of RTE launching a politically motivated character assination. I don't think you can dismiss this as a triviality.


  • #73
    nesf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    J.S. Pill wrote: »
    Can you honestly tell me that sinister music, camera zooms on Ganley and the silent credits did not have then intention of amplifying the sinsiter portrait they were constructing?

    Prime Time is always doing this crap though to make it more sensationalistic and "exciting" or something*. It could be as much just the style of the show rather than anything more calculated and sinister than that. Ganley's background makes him an easy target for this kind of thing. It might be more motivated by ratings and an easy target than anything political.


    *It's one of the reasons I dislike the show actually. I prefer my television more sober.


  • #74
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    studiorat wrote: »
    How long was the program?
    How were the accusations empty? Are you saying he wasn't involved in these schemes. He didn't have Liam Lawlor working for him? He wasn't working with shaw?

    FFS, this is so ridiculous at this stage.

    The accusations were empty because there is no evidence to prove he has done anything wrong. Surely you can understand that.

    Your Liam Lawlor point is ridiculous. Yes, everything Liam Lawlor did in his whole life must be evil. Everyone who worked with him is evil. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

    studiorat wrote: »
    Apart from the music was there anything in the show that you thought was in error?

    *Sigh*

    How about constant empty allegations?

    Did you see the show?

    Have you read any of the posts in this forum?

    studiorat wrote: »
    Firstly he's not a politician it's a privately owned and run political action group run from his company offices. Ganley's business dealings and the example of the people he has shat on have done nothing but prove that he is purely working for his own personal interests.

    The difference is politicians and political bodies own interests usually have the voters in mind. Ganleys interests are business interests for him and his cronies, anti-abortion activists and all the rest of the far right religious crowd.

    I never said he was a politician!

    Every politician and political organisation is motivated by its own interests! Seriously, you know nothing about politics if you think otherwise.

    studiorat wrote: »
    If there was and dishonesty in the show don't you think there'd be lawsuits flying around at this stage?

    ...

    There is a difference between saying someone did something and saying someone might have done something.

    Really, I'm wasting my time talking to you. You don't understand or are blind to the basics.


  • #75
    J.S. Pill
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭J.S. Pill


    nesf wrote: »
    Prime Time is always doing this crap though to make it more sensationalistic and "exciting" or something*.

    I'm not going to disagree with that...
    nesf wrote: »
    It could be as much just the style of the show rather than anything more calculated and sinister than that. Ganley's background makes him an easy target for this kind of thing. It might be more motivated by ratings and an easy target than anything political.

    Point taken but given the timing of the programme and enormous sensitivity of the issues at hand i think it is hard to argue that it was anything other than calculated. I'm probably going out on a bit of a limb here but I see this evolving into something very very similar to John McCain's 'Who is Barack Obama' strategy. There was some instances of this kind of tactic in the run-up to the first referendum but this could be the start of an escalation.


  • #76
    nesf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    J.S. Pill wrote: »
    Point taken but given the timing of the programme and enormous sensitivity of the issues at hand i think it is hard to argue that it was anything other than calculated. I'm probably going out on a bit of a limb here but I see this evolving into something very very similar to John McCain's 'Who is Barack Obama' strategy. There was some instances of this kind of tactic in the run-up to the first referendum but this could be the start of an escalation.

    I think the timing is relatively neutral. We're at least 9 months away from a referendum, if I wanted to do damage to him I'd save this show for a month or less before a new referendum to create sufficient doubt to undermine him and not give him the time to present his case without turning it into a referendum on him personally. As is, there's loads of time for him to combat this and prove any false allegations to be wrong or show that some things were taken out of context before any vote happens. At worst he can step out of the picture and allow different spokespeople to lead the next No campaign.

    The man thrust himself into the public arena, there were always going to be serious questions asked about his background given where he made his money. He might be completely innocent of any wrongdoing but the region he made his money in was a very unstable one and had a lot of really bad things going on in it at the time. This is the kind of thing that will attract shows like Prime Time into looking at his record more closely.


  • #77
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    AARRRGH wrote: »

    Really, I'm wasting my time talking to you. You don't understand or are blind to the basics.

    Methinks the lady doth protest too much, typical reply of a the catholic right wingers...

    I understand a hell of a lot more than you think you do.


  • #78
    The Raven.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,008 ✭✭✭The Raven.


    The power of music should not be underestimated. It undoubtedly affects the perception of listeners both consciously and subliminally. The background music of the Prime Time special on Declan Ganley was blatantly chosen to present a contrived, unfavourable image. It was more like music from a horror film about a serial killer. The sinister atmosphere was set right from the start. The silence at the end was another favourite anxiety tactic of such film makers. For anyone who hasn’t watched the show or is in any doubt, listen to the clip:

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1127/primetime_av.html?2455577,null,230

    I’m still not sure what to make of Ganley, but I won’t be swayed by this type of propaganda. I would have liked to hear more from him about his finances etc. However, I think if I were in his shoes in this instance, I would be extremely cautious about revealing anything of that nature in such an obvious set-up.


  • #79
    axer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,517 ✭✭✭axer


    Prime time gave a mysterious feel to the show i.e. "who is this guy?"

    They make out that he took pensioner's savings and disappeared with the cash but the only evidence they provide is some random old dude.

    Overall the show tries to raise suspicion of this guy and try to leave you with the idea that you cannot trust him. It was a very biased show imo and I it seems to me the timing is to try and slowly blacken him before the next referendum so that the government can hammer it home just before said referendum. RTE could not air something like that just before the referendum or it would be too obvious.


  • #80
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    J.S. Pill wrote: »
    I'm not going to disagree with that...

    Point taken but given the timing of the programme and enormous sensitivity of the issues at hand i think it is hard to argue that it was anything other than calculated. I'm probably going out on a bit of a limb here but I see this evolving into something very very similar to John McCain's 'Who is Barack Obama' strategy. There was some instances of this kind of tactic in the run-up to the first referendum but this could be the start of an escalation.

    I don't know whether that's the case. The point about the timing makes sense on the face of it, but Ganley is only of interest - and hence can be counted on to produce ratings - in the context of the timing. There would be no point in running such a show if there was no current interest in the EU, Lisbon, and Libertas, because it wouldn't attract an audience. And, yes, a bit of mystery and a hint of "something of the night" about him is a far better crowd-puller, as well as being more fun to make, than anything either objective or in-depth.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #81
    The Raven.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,008 ✭✭✭The Raven.


    I think it is disgraceful the way Prime Time dragged up the death in suspicious circumstances of Albanian lawyer and businessman, Kosta Trebicka, described in media reports as ‘a former director of the fund’. They have clearly stated that there has never been a suggestion that his death was in any way associated with Anglo Adriatic, yet they showed a tragic picture of his dead body on the roadside, and even pestered his grieving widow for information. Prime Time has really sunk so low this time.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    Trebecka was involved with AEY, who sold millions worth of sub standard re-packaged arms from China through Albania for use in Afganistan. If it wasn't a shooting accident it more than likely had something to do with this.

    He was also part of Anglo-Adriatic.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3Tur7Hlw7k


  • #83
    SalthillGuy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 329 ✭✭SalthillGuy


    The programme was made for TV.
    Showing him as an ordinary guy who make a few bob and has an opinion would not make for interesting TV.


  • #84
    The Raven.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,008 ✭✭✭The Raven.


    studiorat wrote: »
    Trebecka was involved with AEY, who sold millions worth of sub standard re-packaged arms from China through Albania for use in Afganistan. If it wasn't a shooting accident it more than likely had something to do with this.

    He was also part of Anglo-Adriatic.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3Tur7Hlw7k

    Thanks, Studiorat. I had seen that video, but it is a bit unclear and I wondered if indeed it actually was Trebrika talking as it didn’t show him in the clip. Here is a Reuters version of events, which gives a clearer overall picture.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSLC14849820080912

    The insidious inclusion of the mysterious death of Kosta Trebicka was cunningly designed to undermine the character of Declan Ganley, who obviously had nothing to do with it. The only connection appears to be that Trebricka had been a former director of Anglo Adriatic. Ganley denies any involvement with him. It will be interesting to see if any action is taken on the matter in relation to the ‘slur’ that has emanated from the affair.


  • #85
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    studiorat wrote: »
    Methinks the lady doth protest too much, typical reply of a the catholic right wingers...

    I understand a hell of a lot more than you think you do.

    My problem with your posts is you're letting your dislike of Libertas/Ganley grossly distort your view on things. You can't see this, which makes talking to you very difficult.

    I find it funny how you brought up "typical reply of a the catholic right winger" considering your views are completely dogmatic.

    He might be dodgy (I suspect he probably is) but your views on the man are way too harsh considering the lack of evidence.


  • #86
    J.S. Pill
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭J.S. Pill


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    I don't know whether that's the case. The point about the timing makes sense on the face of it, but Ganley is only of interest - and hence can be counted on to produce ratings - in the context of the timing. There would be no point in running such a show if there was no current interest in the EU, Lisbon, and Libertas, because it wouldn't attract an audience.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    You've got a point there. I suppose if that programme was run at any time at all between now and the second vote someone or other could label the timing as suspect. One could argue either way over whether more damage could have been inflicted by running it at this early stage or closer to the final stretch. It would seem to make more sense to run it closer to the final stretch if maximum damage was the main goal but I think the funding issue reaching a critical juncture provided a good timely setting and running it too close to the end may have backfired by making the yes side look a bit desperate.
    Scofflaw wrote: »
    And, yes, a bit of mystery and a hint of "something of the night" about him is a far better crowd-puller, as well as being more fun to make, than anything either objective or in-depth.

    Here's where I disagree. While ratings is always going to be a factor I think RTE was very much doing it's paymaster's bidding (and I don't mean those of us who bothered to pay our licence!)


  • #87
    Vegeta
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,393 ✭✭✭✭Vegeta


    copacetic wrote: »
    well I see what you are saying, but some of the other posters seem to believe that because they are Ganley supporters then nothing bad about him should be reported even if it is true.

    If you are implying me here, I voted yes to lisbon, and am in no way a Ganley/Libertas supporter. I just thought that Prime Time was pathetic in its approach.

    Instead of letting the interviews and reporting do the talking they added theatrics to the show which is BS in my opinion as it makes the show seem as if they have a position/agenda. Our flag ship media show should not have an agenda/position imho


  • #88
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    SalthillGuy wrote: »
    IMO Declan Ganley will out smart any of our politicans, even the biffo. He has done well in business. The local politican did not rate him, but he has shown them and now has their attention.
    Our way of handling him now is to discredit him and what he is about.
    His business history has been mixed, in reality. He's won a few and he's lost a few, the only difference is that he has played with larger stakes than most. This is not a negative thing, he's a competent businessman and it's just his style - however, neither does it mean that he should be painted as a guru.

    As for 'out smarting' anyone, possibly, but your claim sounds more like hero worship than a dispassionate assessment.
    Deleted User wrote: »
    well said. This is our tv license hard at work. Ganley isnt in power - they should work in the public interest and investigate Mary Harney or Fas or something that is costing us money
    Ganley is not in power, but he was instrumental to the defeat of the Lisbon referendum, and that very much makes him a public figure. Additionally, even if he were not, that should not make him immune from public scrutiny; unless you believe that no one should ever ask questions about the O'Leary's or Smurfits of Ireland. I'm sure Larry Goodman would support such a view.
    btw I think Ganley is dodgy but the bunch in power are dodgy and dangerous as they hold power
    I agree that they too should be held to the same level of public scrutiny - that Haughey wasn't for many years was a disgrace IMHO. But you have to admit, the guy is an investigative reporters dream.

    TBH, while his business past has some relevance as to his moral character and whether people should accept him at face value, I do think it fairly irrelevant. What is relevant, and which the programme touched on, but not in any detail, is the question of Libertas funding - which remains unanswered.


  • #89
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    J.S. Pill wrote: »
    While ratings is always going to be a factor I think RTE was very much doing it's paymaster's bidding (and I don't mean those of us who bothered to pay our licence!)
    Advertisers?


  • #90
    jtsuited
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,401 ✭✭✭jtsuited


    he is by no means an ordinary guy who made a few bob.

    we have still yet to see where he got his money from. when looking at ganley's career the words 'liar', 'swindler' and 'dodgy arms dealer' come to mind very quickly.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    jtsuited wrote: »
    we have still yet to see where he got his money from. when looking at ganley's career the words 'liar', 'swindler' and 'dodgy arms dealer' come to mind very quickly.
    The Prime Time programme did imply that he's a commercial opportunist of flexible ethics, but at no point has anyone come even close to suggesting he has been an arms dealer, dodgy or otherwise.

    As irrational as some of the hero worship here is, making unfounded and fantastic allegations is equally so. Focus on the facts please.


  • #92
    kaiser sauze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,558 ✭✭✭kaiser sauze


    Eurosceptic2008 wrote: »
    That is impossible since Prime Time claimed the letter was a 7 day final-demand letter. There was no such mention of this on an Oireachtas Committee. You are confusing this with Ganley being called before the Oireachtas Committee on Ireland's Future in Europe to put forward the Libertas argument on the Treaty and what should happen now. I wonder was it a copy or a concoction?

    No, you can clearly see copies of portions of the letters on the Prime Time report. This does beg the question how they got them, unless they are available under FoI?

    Having looked into this further I am happy to note that I am not confused. It would seem that you have mixed things up.


  • #93
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,767 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    Eurosceptic2008 wrote: »
    There has been zero evidence to back up those CIA etc. claims. They are lies and you should be aware of our libel laws. The real traitors are those who want to hand over the governance of Ireland to Brussels without a mandate to do so from the people.

    Who exactly wants to hand over governance to Brussels? Just how comprehensive is your knowledge of the Lisbon Treaty and the EU as a whole? There is no real transfer of power to Brussels contained in the Lisbon Treaty, and when you look at some of the big players, i.e. France and England, you will see 2 nations wholly opposed to giving up sovereignty in general. So its all a bit of a non-issue.

    And while there may not be much in the way of evidence regarding Ganleys apparent links to CIA are you 100% sure there are none? Just as it is ridiculous to claim it to be factual, it seems to me to be equally ridiculous to claim its lies, unless you have info to back that up.
    AARRRGH wrote: »
    As the state broadcaster who has an obligation to be impartial, they should have told a balanced story.

    As a profit oriented organisation it has an obligation to get viewers and make money. Sensationalism does just that. After all look at almost every other media outlet there is. RTE are selling a product, end of.
    AARRRGH wrote: »
    What facts? All I saw were empty accusations!

    It would really help your case if you ignored the music and effects etc and focused on the detail. I for one couldn't give a monkies about the music. I want to hear the info and make up my mind on that. I'm not so simple as to be swayed by scary "monster music" (go on Declan, bring on the melodrama!) and silent credits. They are meaningless.

    I didn't see the program myself, but may see if I can find it on the net tonight out of interest.
    AARRRGH wrote: »
    EVERY politician or political body exists to pursue their own interests. Seriously, your weak cheap shots could be fired at anyone.
    AARRRGH wrote: »
    Every politician and political organisation is motivated by its own interests! Seriously, you know nothing about politics if you think otherwise.

    If you took the time out to try and understand his point you would see that what he was saying that a politicians personal interest is in getting re-elected, which means that (s)he must, by default, at least somewhat consider the people in his/her constituency. Therefore a politician must in some way take into account the interests of the people to serve their own interests. Ganley, as a business man, clearly looks after his own interests without any reference to the people at all.


  • #94
    SalthillGuy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 329 ✭✭SalthillGuy


    molloyjh wrote: »
    If you took the time out to try and understand his point you would see that what he was saying that a politicians personal interest is in getting re-elected, which means that (s)he must, by default, at least somewhat consider the people in his/her constituency. Therefore a politician must in some way take into account the interests of the people to serve their own interests. Ganley, as a business man, clearly looks after his own interests without any reference to the people at all.

    This is true of every businessman that goes into politics. They are just looking to control and influence situations from the inside for their own personal gain.
    Declan Ganley is no different.


  • #95
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,767 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    SalthillGuy wrote: »
    This is true of every businessman that goes into politics. They are just looking to control and influence situations from the inside for their own personal gain.
    Declan Ganley is no different.

    Except that right now he answers to noone. Politicians answer to the people - at least when the people could be arsed making it happen.


  • #96
    SalthillGuy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 329 ✭✭SalthillGuy


    Then again, he is not elected.
    If we don't like him, we do not have to elect him.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Cionád
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,000 ✭✭✭Cionád


    http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1204/ganleyd.html

    Haven't seen it yet, will have to give it a watch now. :)


  • #98
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    Cionád wrote: »
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1204/ganleyd.html

    Haven't seen it yet, will have to give it a watch now. :)
    Ganley to sue RTE over Prime Time doc.


    If he wins this case it will give him enough funding to pay off debts on the previous campaign and also cover the cost of the next referendum. :)


  • #99
    mumhaabu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,031 ✭✭✭mumhaabu


    I hope he does win it, RTÉ set out deliberately to tar the guy as some sort of corrupt criminal and did a real hatchet job on him. It was disgraceful reporting and while the left accuses Fox News of Bias, RTÉ made them pale in comparison the way they attacked Declan Ganley. They should be out after the corrupt Fianna Fail politicians that pissed away our prosperity not this guy, he was reading the Financial Times at 15 while others his age would be out drinking buckie and having no ambition. He's a self made guy and Politicians fear this. Like him or Loathe him you have to admire the guy, I certainly do and I hope he cleans out RTÉ for a few mill and then donates some of it to Charity. That'll teach them lefty idiots behind RTÉ.


  • #100
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    mumhaabu wrote: »
    I hope he does win it, RTÉ set out deliberately to tar the guy as some sort of corrupt criminal and did a real hatchet job on him.
    I've asked before on this thread: what was said on that show that was factually untrue?


  • #101
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    Well I guess if he's taking RTE to court over what's been said about him, he'll be taking Boards.ie, Politics.ie, Indymedia, Machine Nation et al to court as well. Cause the same alligators are being made there.

    He really should have gone to the circuit court if he wanted it sorted quickly, the high court will take months...

    I think he's acting emotionally at the moment and using scare tactics to make a lot of news papers run scared.

    It also puts him in the postition where he may not have to discuss the subject because it is in the high court. He could easily let it run for a year or two and just drop it.

    It's just more cynical use of the appratus of the state for his own publicity and ends.

    BTW have a look at libertas' face book, there's about five Irish people on it and the rest are czech.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement