Libertas - friend or foe

mcaul

Libertas seem to have garnered all the headlines recently, but very little research seems to have been done by anyone on them, their reasons for the campaign & their funding.

If one of the main newspaers did any sane article on them, they'd just cry foul. But whao are they? & why are they so set against the Lisbon treaty?

They were only formed last year. All their directors are paid by a US company and they have very little history in Ireland, let alone Europe and yet many people seem to believe the propaganda that they are publsihing.

If there is a no vote, whatever happens, good or bad will not affect Libertas or its funders one iota. So in my opinion there has to be some other reason for their hugely funded campaign, which put the wind up me. Have they used this as a springboard to start a far right movement in Ireland? or is it simply that they are looking for euopean instability to garner more business for their military business?

To simply say they have Ireland's interest at heart it totally and utterly unbeliveable and therefore it was one of the main reasons I double checked the referendum and have decided a definite yes.

The_Minister

mcaul wrote: »

Have they used this as a springboard to start a far right movement in Ireland?

I'm not over the moon about Libertas, but what evidence of this is there?

Rb

I heard they've bigger plans for next year. Can't recall specifically what it was off the top of my head though.

Their communications director is well known and seems to have been involved in some way or another in politics/political parties for quite some time.

nesf

the_minister wrote: »

i'm Not Over The Moon About Libertas, But What Evidence Of This Is There?

+1

FrankGrimes

This link has probably been posted on here before, but it seems you may not have seen it - not sure if anything solid has been done to confirm or undermine its credibility but it's an interesting read for sure.

An article in the Irish Times yesterday also referenced the Libertas funding arrangements and made for quite interesting reading. Of particular interest was the fact that Libertas have called into question the funding of the Alliance for Europe. Alliance for Europe then offerred to show a full statement of their account listing each donation to the Irish Times. Libertas refused to do this.

CptSternn

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87311

Check that link. Libertas is a political group with direct ties to the US military and american secret services. It's leadership and most of the top members are all former US military/CIA. Their president currently owns a few military contracting companies that are operating in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The leadership all have had ties to dictators such as Pinochet, death squads in Albanian, and of course the secret CIA flights just to name a few things they have been directly involved in.

Also note they are a far right-wing group - one that parallels the bush administration and is chock full of other neo-cons.

dresden8

CptSternn wrote: »

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87311

Check that link. Libertas is a political group with direct ties to the US military and american secret services. It's leadership and most of the top members are all former US military/CIA. Their president currently owns a few military contracting companies that are operating in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The leadership all have had ties to dictators such as Pinochet, death squads in Albanian, and of course the secret CIA flights just to name a few things they have been directly involved in.

Do you mean they are Fianna Fáil?

jmayo

CptSternn wrote: »

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87311

Check that link. Libertas is a political group with direct ties to the US military and american secret services. It's leadership and most of the top members are all former US military/CIA. Their president currently owns a few military contracting companies that are operating in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The leadership all have had ties to dictators such as Pinochet, death squads in Albanian, and of course the secret CIA flights just to name a few things they have been directly involved in.

Also note they are a far right-wing group - one that parallels the bush administration and is chock full of other neo-cons.

Rant rant...
I didn't know Ulick McEvaddy was in the CIA :rolleyes:
Oh and according to Indymedia he seems to have recently parachuted himself onto the board of Knock airport.
Except they conveniently forget he grow up only a few miles from the bleeding place and he has been involved with airport and aviation in this country for years before that.

You say their leadership are linked to death squads, dictators etc.
That is a bit rich coming from someone with a link to SF in their signature.
It's not like Gerry, Martin and the boys were never linked to Libya, PLO or Farc rebels etc.
Glasshouse and stones come to mind.

It is almost as laughable as SF now trying to protect our low corporation tax even though they have for years spouted about increasing it to help the poor workers.

humanji

dresden8 wrote: »

Do you mean they are Fianna Fáil?

Well Libertas made those ties through choice not incompetence, so that's one difference between the two, at least.

redspider

I dont know much about Libertas but they do seem to be 'shady', or at least with alterior stategy motives. Maybe we havent seen the last of them. Their links to arms/military business seems to be without question as Declan Ganley doesnt deny that.

One thing I do know is that the lady that was on Vincent Brown on TV3 last night was very well spoken, and clearly has studied the Treaty and EU aspects quite deeply. She also came across in a polite manner, and a lot more mannerly than many of our politicians.

They have added a different dimension to the campaign.

Redspider

mike65

Regarding the indymedia "story", one presumes if Libertas was funded by Hugo Chavez they'd be thrilled to bits.

Ganley has already stated he has no party political ambitions for Libertas so we'll see if that holds true, what David Cochrane (p.ie) has in mind is another matter.

Mike.

ircoha

If the threat posed by the L group to our democracy and that of Europe could keep FF/FG/Lab working together for the benefit of the country then it would be a good thing.

In addition it might get people more interested in what is happening around them rather than whinging into the second G+T between complaints about the price of cocaine.

Libertas have given people something to hang their hat on, without necessarily agreeing with their business interests.

Agent Smith

Rb wrote: »

I heard they've bigger plans for next year. Can't recall specifically what it was off the top of my head though.

Their communications director is well known and seems to have been involved in some way or another in politics/political parties for quite some time.

Resigned From OFF, After a scandel involving Emails being sent by a fake account and Joined FG,
Got into Trouble With FG (sending unautherised Press Releases i think), And Resigned his Position In YFG, And Now Claims to be a member, However his membership may have lapsed.

mcaul

Interesting replies - general feeling from both sides seems to be they are not the cleanest operation. Reasons for this seems to be that they won't answer direct questions about their motives and that their directors are not the most upstanding of citizens.

So why on earth is it that most people are taking their word on Lisbon as Gospel and are dismissing all the arguments given by the political leaders representing 158 out of 166 members of the dail, most trade unions, farmers unions, and virtually every business grouping?

Most non SF no campaigners are just repeating what Libertas have said and have done very little research on the the group whose message they are relaying. You then have the addition of about 15 - 20 b list "celebrity" names and 2 businessmen but don't ytake nto account that the vast majority of business men - those who run large & small business would have no problem putting their name to the yes side!

Actually Prionsius De Rossa's advert in todays Irish Times was probably the best and most informed advert of the campaign, and if a "don't know" person read the advert, I'd be confident they'd vote yes in full knowledge of what they were voting for.

My bet is a yes vote 54% to 46%

The_Minister

Agent Smith wrote: »

Resigned From OFF, After a scandel involving Emails being sent by a fake account and Joined FG,
Got into Trouble With FG (sending unautherised Press Releases i think), And Resigned his Position In YFG, And Now Claims to be a member, However his membership may have lapsed.

Has been rejected by another party.......;)

edanto

So, does anyone know what type of company or legal entity Libertas is?

AFAIK, companies, by law have to give their legal form and directors on their website. Libertas don't do that (at least a search for 'directors' returned no hits and 'legal form' returned nothing relevant) so I have to assume that the law doesn't apply to them somehow or else they have chosen to ignore it.

There is the rumour on indymedia that they are connected with the US military industrial complex, but I've no idea how true that is - or what the rationale of that group to oppose Lisbon could be. Anyone know anything?

BlitzKrieg

they call themselves lobbyists dont they?

sink

I did check out the facts of the indymedia article by examining their sources and I found it to be true that Declan Ganley and that other rich guy from Louth both had stong connection with the US intellegence comunity and military. But I can't go so far as to say they are getting any direct support from them, and I seriously doubt they are. What this does confirm for me is that Declan Ganley and Libertas are not being honest about their motivations because he used the neutrality issue in his campaign, how can he seriously be worried about our neutrality and at the same time supply the CIA with kit? And the other fella refuels CIA rendition flights so they no longer have to land in Europe.

ircoha

Following on from the ft link showing DG in his bus

"Laughing on the bus
Playing games with the faces
She said the man in the gabardine suit was a spy
I said be careful his bowtie is really a camera"

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/p/paul+simon/america_20105970.html


In relation to Biffo et al not knowing who they are: they miss McDowell and the way he shafted Frank [??] re his work/relationship with the Columbia 4

Remember Biffo and " If in doubt leave them out "

BMH

The Irish Times did a detailed background check in Weekend Review a short time ago, revealing a history of failed business ventures, shady dealing in Albania with Liam Lalor and an unambiguous connection with Rivada, a US-based company that supplies technology to the United States military. All but one of the directors of Libertas are Rivada employees, so it seems like that while Ganley is bankrolling the operation, he's not going to be losing whatever he invests.

About whether they'll stay after the referendum, I'd doubt it, since they don't seem to have any grassroots whatsoever. Ganley did issue a veiled threat yesterday though, stating that he'd be in contact with the Irish Times following the referendum. When asked what he meant, he just repeated the statement.

Rather than dismiss them based on this though, it would be fairer to read the points they make and the refutations made by Scofflaw and sink on these boards and make up your own mind.

e:Here's the contact page for Rivada, with the subsidiary in Moyne Park, Tuam. I'm sure the location sounds familiar.
http://www.rivada.com/contact.htm
Here's their page on Declan Ganley
http://www.rivada.com/about/keypersonnel/declanjganley.htm
And here's Ganleygroup, which shares much of its "Management Team" with Rivada.
http://www.ganleygroup.com/management/declanjganley.htm
And finally, an article on a report on Ganley, stating that he's close to becoming a billionaire before his 40th birthday.
http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2006/03/19/story12731.asp

Crash

Agent Smith wrote: »

Resigned From OFF, After a scandel involving Emails being sent by a fake account and Joined FG,
Got into Trouble With FG (sending unautherised Press Releases i think), And Resigned his Position In YFG, And Now Claims to be a member, However his membership may have lapsed.

Hahah I wondered what he was up to after finishing with USI - interesting.

Scofflaw

sink wrote: »

I did check out the facts of the indymedia article by examining their sources and I found it to be true that Declan Ganley and that other rich guy from Louth both had stong connection with the US intellegence comunity and military. But I can't go so far as to say they are getting any direct support from them, and I seriously doubt they are. What this does confirm for me is that Declan Ganley and Libertas are not being honest about their motivations because he used the neutrality issue in his campaign, how can he seriously be worried about our neutrality and at the same time supply the CIA with kit? And the other fella refuels CIA rendition flights so they no longer have to land in Europe.

To be fair, you could sell the US defence/intel complex stuff and still support Irish neutrality - hypocritically, perhaps, but genuinely.

What you can't do, though, I would say, is support Irish neutrality and want to open Knock Airport to the same kind of US traffic as Shannon:

RTE wrote:

Businessman Ulick McEvaddy has confirmed that he will discuss letting the US military use Knock Airport at its next board meeting in March.

Mr McEvaddy, who was appointed to the board of the airport last month, said he would be in favour of anything that would benefit Knock Airport and the people of Mayo.

He said he saw no reason why US military planes could not land at Knock.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Crash

Anyone any idea how many (other than one) of the old freedom institute are now in libertas?

BlitzKrieg

scofflow do you have a link to that RTE article, I mentioned that story to my mum earlier and she refused to believe me. I'd love to show it to her.

Bob the Builder

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

scofflow do you have a link to that RTE article, I mentioned that story to my mum earlier and she refused to believe me. I'd love to show it to her.

here it is: http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0114/knock.html

The Corinthian

Scofflaw wrote: »

To be fair, you could sell the US defence/intel complex stuff and still support Irish neutrality - hypocritically, perhaps, but genuinely.

Is that not the essence of Irish neutrality?

I've done a little poking around this Libertas lot and would have to say that I'd trust them as far as I'd spit a dead rat.

edanto

I have a report of Ganley speaking to a private audience before where he said that the most important thing in his life was his Catholicism and that was driving him to be against Lisbon.

How would that tie in with their suspicuous funding and US links?

Also - they're late filing their accounts with the CRO. Basically, they have provided no financial information other than revealing that they spent upwards of €1.3m on a No campaign.

What else have you found TC?

Hitman Actual

edanto wrote: »

I have a report of Ganley speaking to a private audience before where he said that the most important thing in his life was his Catholicism and that was driving him to be against Lisbon.

I know someone whose reason for voting No is that, apparently, the Irish negotiators failed to get a mention of God in the treaty (I kid you not). Perhaps this is Ganly's true motive?

DadaKopf

The Corinthian wrote: »

Is that not the essence of Irish neutrality?

I've done a little poking around this Libertas lot and would have to say that I'd trust them as far as I'd spit a dead rat.

For once, I agree with Corinthian. I've been doing some snooping the past two months or so.

My guess is Libertas is a PR vehicle for Rivada and his other defence/security-related ventures. Colm Keena suggested that Ganley's company is in debt, suggesting that he's not getting the contracts in Washington DC yet. It's my guess that Libertas was created as a communication tool to demonstrate Rivada's commitment to a strong US and weak EU under the yoke of NATO. Why else would it make sense to vote 'no' to a treaty that appears to commit member-states to spending more on military and security hardware? Because the EU might displace NATO as the US's tool of control in Europe. Add to that John Bolton's recent statement about Lisbon being against US interests and this circle begins to take shape. But I couldn't be sure, it's just my interpretation of the facts I've gathered.

The Phoenix also said that Ulick McEvaddy's reason to vote 'no' is because Lisbon would put strict limits on carbon emissions. But since he makes his money flying US troops and other individuals around the world, this could limit his profit margins.

On the funding issue, I read in the Sunday Business Post that Libertas is funded significantly by loans. Again, this is just conjecture, but could it be possible that whoever loaned Libertas the war chest might just forget about the whole thing after the campaign rolls to a halt?

We might all like to be careful here. Ganley enjoys suing people for defamation.

TheBigLebowski

Is Libertas being funded and supported by the yanks in order to prevent a stronger Europe and another major world superpower?

DadaKopf

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Is Libertas being funded and supported by the yanks in order to prevent a stronger Europe and another major world superpower?

Nobody's suggested that.

The Corinthian

edanto wrote: »

I have a report of Ganley speaking to a private audience before where he said that the most important thing in his life was his Catholicism and that was driving him to be against Lisbon.

How would that tie in with their suspicuous funding and US links?

Taking that comment at face value, any religious fundamentalist motivation to opposing EU integration would find a lot of friends in the US. Remember that many of the lobby groups and supporters of the Neocon movement in there are driven by religious rather than ideological conviction; viewing the establishment of Israel as a first step towards a second coming of Christ and 'the Rapture', for example. Equally millennial is the belief that the EU is essentially the Black Beast of the book of Revelations (an argument that was once made to me by one such fundamentalist) and thus to be opposed.

From the more secular viewpoint of US interests, the EU is a clear competitor to their economic interests. As such, while not wanting to destroy it, it is in their interests to weaken the bloc so that it cannot cohesively act in a manner that would threaten them. Retaining influence on the Anglophone EU states (UK & Ireland) is also in US interests for the similar reasons - an isolated Ireland is easier to bully into giving favourable business deals to US firms or allow movement of US troops or military materials through her territory than one that has the EU to back her up, after all. Indeed, if I was involved in the arms industry, I'd want to protect the malleability of the country I am operating through.

Either way, be Libertas' motivation religious or commercial, neither strikes me as in this country's interests.

Also - they're late filing their accounts with the CRO. Basically, they have provided no financial information other than revealing that they spent upwards of €1.3m on a No campaign.

I suspect that this will make the light of day long after the referendum, but by then will no longer be particularly newsworthy and thus not really make any difference.

What else have you found TC?

As I said I've only done a little poking around, so not a Hell of a lot, as I've other matters on my mind these days (Real Life). Enough to raise an eyebrow and realize that there's something not quite right about them though, IMHO.

The Corinthian

DadaKopf wrote: »

Nobody's suggested that.

Well, I would/have.

DadaKopf

The Corinthian wrote: »

Well, I would/have.

We don't want boards.ie to get shut down now, do we? I'm sure there's little risk, but I have heard Ganley likes to sue people for sullying his good name. A trick he picked up off the neo-cons, perhaps?

The Corinthian

DadaKopf wrote: »

We might all like to be careful here. Ganley enjoys suing people for defamation.

No one has accused him of anything and any postulation made so far in this thread would be clearly identified as fair comment based upon publicly available information.

The Corinthian

DadaKopf wrote: »

We don't want boards.ie to get shut down now, do we? I'm sure there's little risk, but I have heard Ganley likes to sue people for sullying his good name. A trick he picked up off the neo-cons, perhaps?

Suggesting that a government, or associated NGO, may want to fund a lobby group for certain motives does not imply that the lobby group shares those motives.

padair

Libertas was set up last year by was Declan Ganelly (Sorry about the spelling) using his company (The one which sell comunication software to teh US government). He employeed two people to soley work on the Lisbon treaty. When creating Libertas he used, I think two of his fellow directors of the communications company.

The question is what does he get out of this. He claims that he is Pro European, fair enough.. Is he doing this to get headlines and inches so he can run for office himself....?

Clare_Guy

If they're irish or european citizens and as long as the pay their taxes and obey the laws it doesn't matter what their motivations are.

They have every right to stand up for what the believe in.

sink

Clare_Guy wrote: »

If they're irish or european citizens and as long as the pay their taxes and obey the laws it doesn't matter what their motivations are.

They have every right to stand up for what the believe in.

Neutrality is important to a US intelligence/military supplier? Obviously their motives are not what they would first appear.

Clare_Guy

sink wrote: »

Neutrality is important to a US intelligence/military supplier? Obviously their motives are not what they would first appear.

Doesn't matter, as i said, as long as they're irish or european citizens and pay their taxes they're entitled to run a campaign.

Irish neutrality should be important to every irish person...

nesf

Clare_Guy wrote: »

Doesn't matter, as i said, as long as they're irish or european citizens and pay their taxes they're entitled to run a campaign.

That doesn't mean they aren't open to criticism and their motives being questioned.

The Corinthian

Clare_Guy wrote: »

Doesn't matter, as i said, as long as they're irish or european citizens and pay their taxes they're entitled to run a campaign.

Of course they're entitled to run a campaign on the basis of what they believe in. That does not mean that the rest of us are not allowed to question those beliefs or the validity of their motivations or arguments.

Irish neutrality should be important to every irish person...

If Ireland was actually a neutral country, I'd take that comment seriously.

Clare_Guy

nesf wrote: »

That doesn't mean they aren't open to criticism and their motives being questioned.

Anyone who expresses an opinion is open to criticism. Questioning their motives is irrelevant because if they fulfill the criteria of being irish or at least european then their motivations are clear. The result of this referendum will affect their lives and their families lives.

padair

The Corinthian wrote: »

If Ireland was actually a neutral country, I'd take that comment seriously.

Does anyone want Ireland to be neutral anymore....? The only reason we are neutral is because we were not a recognised country when we originally said we would be neutral..

Clare_Guy

The Corinthian wrote: »

If Ireland was actually a neutral country, I'd take that comment seriously.

It's written into our constitution that we're neutral. It's an inalienable right.

If more people took it"seriously" maybe we'd be in a stronger position...?

Clare_Guy

padair wrote: »

Does anyone want Ireland to be neutral anymore....?

It doesn't matter what people "want", it's in our constitution, if we "wanted" to change our neutral position it would require a constitutional referendum.

padair wrote: »

The only reason we are neutral is because we were not a recognised country when we originally said we would be neutral..

what??

IRLConor

Clare_Guy wrote: »

It's written into our constitution that we're neutral.

No it's not. Citation please.

BlitzKrieg

nevf wrote: »

here it is: http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0114/knock.html

thanks for that. It changed my mums vote from a no to a yes showing her that.

She wouldnt believe me that Libertas couldnt be trusted, once I showed her that she actually read the treaty website.

Scofflaw

Clare_Guy wrote: »

It's written into our constitution that we're neutral. It's an inalienable right.

If more people took it"seriously" maybe we'd be in a stronger position...?

No, it's purely a government policy. There is no reference whatsoever to neutrality in our Constitution.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The Corinthian

Clare_Guy wrote: »

It's written into our constitution that we're neutral. It's an inalienable right.

As has been already pointed out it's not written into our constitution.

Secondly, Irish neutrality is a myth, most recently debunked by the recent rulling that the allowing of passage of belligerent troops was in direct contravention of the Hague Convention on what defines a neutral state.

If more people took it"seriously" maybe we'd be in a stronger position...?

Looking beneath the PR machine of either campaign at the motivations therein is very much part of taking it "seriously".

Clare_Guy

IRLConor wrote: »

No it's not. Citation please.

My bad, sorry. I assumed without checking. Heard a quote from dev last week which i mistook as a quote from the constitution.

Article 29

1. Ireland affirms its devotion to the ideal of peace and friendly co-operation amongst nations founded on international justice and morality.

2. Ireland affirms its adherence to the principle of the pacific settlement of disputes by international arbitration or judicial determination.

3. Ireland accepts the generally recognised principles of international law as its rule of conduct in its relations with other States