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

Declan Ganley - Prime Time special

124

Comments

  • #92
    kaiser sauze
    Registered Users 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: 24,744 ✭✭✭✭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 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: 24,744 ✭✭✭✭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 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 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: 28,789 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
  • #102
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    mumhaabu wrote: »
    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.

    The cult of celebrity reaches to business men now I see.

    Actually now that I look at the story again, he only took advice from his solicitors. He hasn't actually taken a case against RTE. It's an old trick, send out a press release that you are seeking advice from your legal team about suing and the news usually picks it up as an actual legal case.

    Louis Walsh eat your heart out!
    RTÉ has said it has not had any contact from Mr Ganley or Libertas in relation to the matter and so was unable to comment at this time.

    he's a bleedin' chancer.


  • #103
    Zulu
    Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭Zulu


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I've asked before on this thread: what was said on that show that was factually untrue?
    Absolutely nothing.


  • #104
    studiorat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    Actually to one more thing.

    "The tort of defamation protects those whose reputations have been unlawfully injured. It affords little or no protection to those who have, or deserve to have, no reputation deserving of legal protection." - The Hon. Chief Justice, Mr. Ronan Keane
    ireland.com - The Irish Times – IRELAND

    Sorry for the Cut and Paste but I'm quoting cause it's a good point...

    Rte are so worried about Ganleys threats that in the news item announcing his threat they have provided a link for web user to view the Primetime special again!!! This is not usual when threats of legal action are made. Therefore they are laughing at the false threats

    Declan Ganley plans to sue RTÉ

    "they are making an institutional comment on Declan Ganley"

    "Who do you think you are kidding?"

    On another front there were several who whined about the issues raised over the last month eg Russia , Kipelovo Forestry, National Timber, Cyprus, Albania , Kosta T, etc; Anglo Abanian Investment Fund, Declan Ganley's past , Iraq, jack Shaw , Don Di Marino I note that Primetime touched on all those matters so who was off topic??

    Nb "A daily rain falls on Tirana" by John Sweeney The Observer London (UK): Mar 16, 1997. p. C4


    Declan Ganley's first mention in the Observer newspaper in 1997.

    "Over by the bar chatting to some Albanian chancers is pink-fleshed
    gimlet-eyed Declan Ganley, financier from the City of London. Ganley believes in the strength of the Albanian economy. He has to his company Anglo Adriatic does something with funds. I first met him ten days ago
    at Rome airport when he was returning from New York to Tirana. He told
    me all this mess is just your type hyping it up, Berisha is not in
    trouble. All this country need is a couple of good PR men"
    Two months later he told the Guardian that his Anglo Adriatic Investment Fund would have £220,000,000 within one week."

    Underside
    Dan Atkinson
    The Guardian (1959-2003); Mar 21, 1997)
    pg. 24"



    Rte also failed to go into Ganley's other think tank
    http://www.forumonpublicsafety.com
    __________________
    sometimes you can just smell it

    0001dc7710dr.jpg

    http://www.politics.ie/lisbon-treaty/37941-prime-time-special-declan-ganley-107.html#post1309759

    http://www.forumonpublicsafety.com/images/forumimag.jpg

    http://www.forumonpublicsafety.com


  • #105
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I've asked before on this thread: what was said on that show that was factually untrue?
    Actually, you can still be guilty of defamation under Irish law, even if nothing you've said is technically not a provable fact - it is what is implied or inferred that matters.
    studiorat wrote: »
    he's a bleedin' chancer.
    Which oddly enough was what was implied by the Prime Time programme.


  • #106
    SalthillGuy
    Registered Users Posts: 329 ✭✭SalthillGuy


    I imagine a guy like this would not take on RTE unless he had a good angle.
    There is took much to loose.
    It is not like free publicity.
    I hope he wins, as I thought the reporting was biased and influenced by someone.?????


  • #107
    Highsider
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,384 ✭✭✭Highsider


    SalthillGuy wrote: »
    I imagine a guy like this would not take on RTE unless he had a good angle.
    There is took much to loose.
    It is not like free publicity.
    I hope he wins, as I thought the reporting was biased and influenced by someone.?????
    Of course it was biased...it's RTE


  • #108
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    SalthillGuy wrote: »
    I imagine a guy like this would not take on RTE unless he had a good angle.
    There is took much to loose.
    It is not like free publicity.
    It is free publicity though. Doing nothing sends the message that he accepts RTE's accusations, challenging those accusations puts doubt into people's minds about them. People take out defamation cases for many reasons. Winning isn't always one of them.
    I hope he wins, as I thought the reporting was biased and influenced by someone.?????
    Is this the Brussels conspiracy theory, perchance?


  • #109
    SalthillGuy
    Registered Users Posts: 329 ✭✭SalthillGuy


    RTE have a duty to the public for balanced reporting (even accurate). When it is as obvious as RTE made it that night, they do not do themselves any favours and consequently to whole programme lacks credibility.


  • #110
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    SalthillGuy wrote: »
    RTE have a duty to the public for balanced reporting (even accurate).
    Pretty much all reporting has a slant or story. You do research, you develop your story, then you dig further so that you can support this story. If you don't believe me, please feel free to point out any report from any media outlet that does not have a slant.

    As for accuracy, unless you want to suggest that they either misrepresented or even lied as to the facts, it was accurate. Certainly it did not paint a complimentary picture of Ganley's character, but if true, it would be difficult to present them otherwise.
    When it is as obvious as RTE made it that night, they do not do themselves any favours and consequently to whole programme lacks credibility.
    That's not obvious, that's an opinion. Try not to get confused between the two.


  • #111
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,789 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    The Corinthian wrote: »
    Actually, you can still be guilty of defamation under Irish law, even if nothing you've said is technically not a provable fact - it is what is implied or inferred that matters.
    Well, was anything implied or inferred by that program that wasn't true?


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Well, was anything implied or inferred by that program that wasn't true?
    It could be argued that there was an implication that his involvement in the Albanian venture was fraudulent. I can't say if there was a clear implication of this, but if I was a libel lawyer, this would likely be the main area I would leverage.

    Additionally, it could be taken that he was portrayed as pathologically untruthful and untrustworthy - a bit of a cowboy. Certainly there is plenty of evidence that he's a bit of a wide-boy, but that's not the same as being fraudulent (for which there is no evidence).

    All of the above are speculative and I moot them purely for the purposes of abstract discussion - Without Prejudice.

    Either way, his announcement I believe that he is seeking legal advice is a PR exercise (seeking legal advice is not, but announcing it is). Whether this translate into legal action, let alone successful legal action, is another matter.


  • #113
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Another thing is that I am assuming that RTE did their homework correctly and that the facts presented are verifiable. If not, these would also be actionable. Remember, in defamation, the onus is on the defendant to prove or show evidence as to their facts. If they cannot to the satisfaction of the court, they will lose the case even if those facts are actually true.


  • #114
    kaiser sauze
    Registered Users Posts: 1,558 ✭✭✭kaiser sauze


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I've asked before on this thread: what was said on that show that was factually untrue?

    What on that show was proven?

    What on that show was not mere speculation?


  • #115
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    kaiser sauze wrote: »
    What on that show was proven?

    What on that show was not mere speculation?
    There were quite a few things that were 'proven'; that Ganley ran certain ventures, had associations with certain individuals and did certain things. It is in presenting these things that certain additional conclusions, relating to his motivations and character, were reached that could be argued as being speculative.


  • #116
    Eurosceptic2008
    Closed Accounts Posts: 81 ✭✭Eurosceptic2008


    Why were the supposed wife and the supposed former minister not willing to go on camera? We didn't even hear the woman's voice. This is suspicious, and reminds me of McCarthyism and the intolerance of dissent being directed at the no voters and campaigners.


  • #117
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,789 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Eurosceptic2008 wrote: »
    Why were the supposed wife and the supposed former minister not willing to go on camera? We didn't even hear the woman's voice. This is suspicious, and reminds me of McCarthyism and the intolerance of dissent being directed at the no voters and campaigners.
    Are you accusing RTE of lying about what they said? And what, exactly, is a "supposed wife"?


  • #118
    Eurosceptic2008
    Closed Accounts Posts: 81 ✭✭Eurosceptic2008


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Are you accusing RTE of lying about what they said? And what, exactly, is a "supposed wife"?

    I'm not accusing but I am inquiring. We have no proof that the widow (the wife I'm talking about) of the murdered Albanian said he had met Ganley. And we didn't see that former Latvian minister on camera. Why was that?


  • #119
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,789 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Eurosceptic2008 wrote: »
    I'm not accusing but I am inquiring.
    Unless it was a rhetorical question, it's directed to the wrong audience: why would anyone here know the answers?
    We have no proof that the widow (the wife I'm talking about) of the murdered Albanian said he had met Ganley.
    I'm still not clear why she's a "supposed" wife. And no, we have no proof. But if the RTE reporter says she said it, then either she said it or RTE are lying about her saying it.
    And we didn't see that former Latvian minister on camera. Why was that?
    Presumably because he didn't want to be on camera. Again, the reporter quoted him - do you think she was lying?


  • #120
    Eurosceptic2008
    Closed Accounts Posts: 81 ✭✭Eurosceptic2008


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Unless it was a rhetorical question, it's directed to the wrong audience: why would anyone here know the answers? I'm still not clear why she's a "supposed" wife. And no, we have no proof. But if the RTE reporter says she said it, then either she said it or RTE are lying about her saying it. Presumably because he didn't want to be on camera. Again, the reporter quoted him - do you think she was lying?

    No but I am curious about those issues I asked about. If Ganley is going to sue, he must have basis for doing so.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,789 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    So ask RTE.

    I'm curious whether Ganley actually will sue. I'll be mildly surprised if he does. From experience, RTE tend to be cautious about getting their facts straight. I don't believe for a moment that they straight-out fabricated witness statements.


Advertisement