O'Leary admits on TV3 that Ryanairs Yes campaign is all about getting Aer Lingus

tonycascarino

http://www.tv3.ie/shows.php?request=businessmatters&tv3_preview=&video=14169

Interview starts 18 minutes in :

To take an exact quote at 20minutes and 8 secs :

"Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persude them to sell me Aer Lingus"

Michael has really shot himself in the foot here. This is just more proof that business organisations only want a Yes out self-interest.;)

ei.sdraob

tonycascarino wrote: »

http://www.tv3.ie/shows.php?request=businessmatters&tv3_preview=&video=14169

Interview starts 18 minutes in :

To take an exact quote at 20minutes and 8 secs :

"Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persude them to sell me Aer Lingus"

Michael has really shot himself in the foot here. This is just more proof that business organisations only want a Yes out self-interest.;)

we always knew were Mick stood

now where does Declan Ganley and his military buddies stand?


?

My name is URL

Well I'm sure that'll come as no surprise to anyone that O'Leary has his own agendas for campaigning for a Yes vote

meglome

It's one of the very perplexing things about the No campaign. I understand that Ryanair want to make money, I understand that Intel want to make money. But how would potentially making the economy weaker by voting No help anyone.

Scofflaw

tonycascarino wrote: »

http://www.tv3.ie/shows.php?request=businessmatters&tv3_preview=&video=14169

Interview starts 18 minutes in :

To take an exact quote at 20minutes and 8 secs :

"Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persude them to sell me Aer Lingus"

Michael has really shot himself in the foot here. This is just more proof that business organisations only want a Yes out self-interest.;)

Actually, that is a completely false transcription. He is answering the question as to whether his campaign for a yes vote is intended to persuade the European Commission to let him buy Aer Lingus, and his answer is that it's the Irish government he has to persuade, even though they're incompetent, and that the idea he needs European approval "is bollocks".

regards,
Scofflaw

AARRRGH

ei.sdraob wrote: »

now where does Declan Ganley and his military buddies stand?

Don't be so naive.

EVERYONE who wants a yes or no vote has a vested interest.

You're only fooling yourself if you think our politicians want us to vote yes because it's good for our country.

Declan Ganley is the same as everyone else.

destroyer

:eek: business organisations only want a Yes out self-interest.:eek:

Well can you believe it.

My name is URL

meglome wrote: »

It's one of the very perplexing things about the No campaign. I understand that Ryanair want to make money, I understand that Intel want to make money. But how would potentially making the economy weaker by voting No help anyone.

Potentially being the operative word. It's not a certainty that Ireland's place in Europe would be affected by a No vote, and yet the Yes side's greatest leverage is to convince people that the country is fcuked if we vote No

Sam Vimes

What was said:

Yates: Do you think that your campaign for a yes vote will ensure commission approval?

MOL: No, Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent and yet I need to persude them to sell me Aer Lingus. The nonsense that I need European approval is just that, rubbish. Look, I'm campaigning for a yes vote because I think it's in the best interest of the Irish economy and the nearly 500,000 people who will be unemployed at the end of the year.


You have taken the exact opposite meaning from the intended one. Well done

Sam Vimes

destroyer wrote: »

:eek: business organisations only want a Yes out self-interest.:eek:

Well can you believe it.

And yet the people on the no side say a yes vote won't help the economy. Both statements cannot be true.

meglome

AARRRGH wrote: »

Don't be so naive.

EVERYONE who wants a yes or no vote has a vested interest.

You're only fooling yourself if you think our politicians want us to vote yes because it's good for our country.

Declan Ganley is the same as everyone else.

I'm not sure that doing what's best for this country could be called a vested interest.

People like Ganley on the other hand are very suspicious.

My name is URL wrote: »

Potentially being the operative word. It's not a certainty that Ireland's place in Europe would be affected by a No vote, and yet the Yes side's greatest leverage is to convince people that the country is fcuked if we vote No

Well since we're basically bankrupt that potential will be very important.

ei.sdraob

AARRRGH wrote: »

Don't be so naive.

EVERYONE who wants a yes or no vote has a vested interest.

You're only fooling yourself if you think our politicians want us to vote yes because it's good for our country.

Declan Ganley is the same as everyone else.

except no one elected him

and he cant take NO for an answer and lingers around like a bad smell

PopeBuckfastXVI

tonycascarino wrote: »

http://www.tv3.ie/shows.php?request=businessmatters&tv3_preview=&video=14169

Interview starts 18 minutes in :

To take an exact quote at 20minutes and 8 secs :

"Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persude them to sell me Aer Lingus"

Michael has really shot himself in the foot here. This is just more proof that business organisations only want a Yes out self-interest.;)

Full Quote, if anyone's interested:

Interviewer:
Do you think your campaign for a yes vote will secure commission approval?
MOL:
No, I mean look my my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persuade them to sell me Aer Lingus, so the nonsense that I need European approval is just that; rubbish. Look, I'm campaigning for a yes vote because I think it's in the best interests of the Irish economy, and more importantly the nearly five hundred thousand people who'll be unemployed in this economy by the end of this year.


The thread title could just as well be 'O'Leary admits on TV3 that Ryanairs Yes campaign is all getting the unemployed jobs'.

Edit: Dammit Sam!

Sam Vimes

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Edit: Dammit Sam!

Bwahahahahahaha

PopeBuckfastXVI

meglome wrote: »

It's one of the very perplexing things about the No campaign. I understand that Ryanair want to make money, I understand that Intel want to make money. But how would potentially making the economy weaker by voting No help anyone.

Don't you understand? Decreasing profits for big business is good for their workers?

Sheesh, I would have thought that was obvious...

tonycascarino

Sam Vimes wrote: »

What was said:


Look, I'm campaigning for a yes vote because I think it's in the best interest of the Irish economy and the nearly 500,000 people who will be unemployed at the end of the year.


You have taken the exact opposite meaning from the intended one. Well done

Anyone with half a brain can see that O'Leary doesn't give a toss about workers. It's all mé féin

with him. The only thing that concerns O'Leary is buying Aer Lingus.;)

marco_polo

Sam Vimes wrote: »

What was said:

Yates: Do you think that your campaign for a yes vote will ensure commission approval?

MOL: No, Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent and yet I need to persude them to sell me Aer Lingus. The nonsense that I need European approval is just that, rubbish. Look, I'm campaigning for a yes vote because I think it's in the best interest of the Irish economy and the nearly 500,000 people who will be unemployed at the end of the year.


You have taken the exact opposite meaning from the intended one. Well done

There must a buggy version of windows floating around, where the copy and paste function mysteriously truncates critical additional lines of information from the end of quotations.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Bwahahahahahaha

I still think my usage of a semi-colon before the word 'rubbish' is better than your comma though...

Sam Vimes

tonycascarino wrote: »

Anyone with half a brain can see that O'Leary doesn't give a toss about workers. It's all mé féin

with him. The only thing that concerns O'Leary is buying Aer Lingus.;)

That may be, but he did not in fact "admit on TV3 that Ryanairs Yes campaign is all about getting Aer Lingus ". In reality he said the exact opposite. So would you like to retract your statement?

marco_polo

tonycascarino wrote: »

Anyone with half a brain can see that O'Leary doesn't give a toss about workers. It's all mé féin

with him. The only thing that concerns O'Leary is buying Aer Lingus.;)

Could say the exact same thing about Mr Gantley. I certainly haven't heard him harping on about workers rights thus far. Lisbon is far too socialist for his liking.

tonycascarino

It's also interesting that there's an article in the Irish Times today whereby a large

estate in O'Leary's hometown of Mullingar is visited. Only 1 person in the whole estate is

going to vote Yes. Looks like even his own hometown people don't share his views on

Lisbon either.

Sam Vimes

tonycascarino wrote: »

It's also interesting that there's an article in the Irish Times today whereby a large

estate in O'Leary's hometown of Mullingar is visited. Only 1 person in the whole estate is

going to vote Yes. Looks like even his own hometown people don't share his views on

Lisbon either.

He did not in fact "admit on TV3 that Ryanairs Yes campaign is all about getting Aer Lingus ". In reality he said the exact opposite. So would you like to retract your statement?

PopeBuckfastXVI

tonycascarino wrote: »

It's also interesting that there's an article in the Irish Times today whereby a large

estate in O'Leary's hometown of Mullingar is visited. Only 1 person in the whole estate is

going to vote Yes. Looks like even his own hometown people don't share his views on

Lisbon either.

Does he live in that estate? One would imagine that sampling a particular estate would present a very slim slice of socio-economic diversity, leading to likely consensus in the findings, of course...

tonycascarino

Sam Vimes wrote: »

He did not in fact "admit on TV3 that Ryanairs Yes campaign is all about getting Aer Lingus ". In reality he said the exact opposite. So would you like to retract your statement?

"Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persuade them to sell me Aer Lingus"

So yes he did admit it.

meglome

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Don't you understand? Decreasing profits for big business is good for their workers?

Sheesh, I would have thought that was obvious...

Really some people have no idea who actually generates the wealth in an economy and who pays most of the taxes. It's just easier to rant on about how 'the elites' want to enslave us all.

tonycascarino wrote: »

"Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persuade them to sell me Aer Lingus"

So yes he did admit it.

The same tactic as every single conspiracy theory site. Selectively quote someone to change the context to suit whatever nonsense they're pushing.

Are you really going to take a part of what he said, pretend he meant the opposite and then assume we're idiots?

PopeBuckfastXVI

tonycascarino wrote: »

"Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persuade them to sell me Aer Lingus"

So yes he did admit it.

Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent

I'm campaigning for a 'yes' vote because our government is incompetent too.

Hang on... does that mean I get Aer Lingus??

marco_polo

tonycascarino wrote: »

"Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persuade them to sell me Aer Lingus"

So yes he did admit it.

I remember the days when you used to just silently thank all the posts that were bare faced lies, now you are making them up yourself I see. And then repeating them over and over again.

AARRRGH

meglome wrote: »

I'm not sure that doing what's best for this country could be called a vested interest.

No one wants us to vote yes because it's best for the country.

Please don't tell me you think our politicians suddenly have the country's best interests at heart.

meglome

AARRRGH wrote: »

No one wants us to vote yes because it's best for the country.

Please don't tell me you think our politicians suddenly have the country's best interests at heart.

Ah right it must be just me then.

And as for our politicians I'm not assuming anything, I'm making up my own mind based on what I believe is best.

Sam Vimes

tonycascarino wrote: »

"Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persuade them to sell me Aer Lingus"

So yes he did admit it.

Are you serious?

"The nonsense that I need European approval is just that, rubbish. Look, I'm campaigning for a yes vote because I think it's in the best interests of the Irish economy and the nearly 500,000 people who will be unemployed at the end of the year."

I can selectively quote too, except my quote gives the actual meaning of what was said where yours gives a deliberately false meaning. I'd love to say this is a new low for the no campaign but that would unfortunately not be true

FutureGuy

If I were to vote yes, it would not because of the great campaign that the Yes side were runing, but because of the pile of sh!te that the no vote has been churning out on an almost daily basis. It's bloody pathetic.

Going to work, all I see are pathetic attempts at scaremongering (minimum wage 1.85?) plastered all over the place.

OP, post the entire quote or don't post at all.

AARRRGH

FutureGuy wrote: »

If I were to vote yes, it would not because of the great campaign that the Yes side were runing, but because of the pile of sh!te that the no vote has been churning out on an almost daily basis. It's bloody pathetic. OP, post the entire quote or don't post at all.

A lot of people are going to vote no for the opposite reason.

oscarBravo

tonycascarino wrote: »

It's also interesting that there's an article in the Irish Times today whereby a large estate in O'Leary's hometown of Mullingar is visited. Only 1 person in the whole estate is going to vote Yes. Looks like even his own hometown people don't share his views on Lisbon either.

O'Leary lives outside Delvin, not in Mullingar. Raithín isn't a particularly big estate (I'd describe it as medium by Mullingar standards), and it's population isn't a representative sample of Mullingar's.

Sam Vimes

AARRRGH wrote: »

A lot of people are going to vote no for the opposite reason.

Except that the "sh!te" coming from the yes side is supported by 91% of economists, 90% of businesses and the majority of trade unions and therefore is not "sh!te". People call it sh!te for two reasons:

1. They don't want to believe that a no vote will make economic recovery more difficult, no matter how many experts tell them it will
2. They think that if they can label those on the yes side as liars it in some way justifies the actual lies on the no side

Euro_Kraut

Tony, your OP is dishonest. I think it is appalling that you would attempt to mislead people.

I hope you never harp on about corruption or morality in Irish politics. You have displayed all the characteristics of the morally bankrupt politicians that have blighted our country. Shame on you.

AARRRGH

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Except that the "sh!te" coming from the yes side is supported by 91% of economists, 90% of businesses and the majority of trade unions and therefore is not "sh!te". People call it sh!te for two reasons:

1. They don't want to believe that a no vote will make economic recovery more difficult, no matter how many experts tell them it will
2. They think that if they can label those on the yes side as liars it in some way justifies the actual lies on the no side

Come on, obviously people with an interest in business will want a yes vote. But is "best for business" the right reason to vote yes? I don't believe it is.

Long term I don't believe a Germany/France controlled Europe is best for Ireland.

Sam Vimes

AARRRGH wrote: »

Come on, obviously people with an interest in business will want a yes vote. But is "best for business" the right reason to vote yes? I don't believe it is.

It may or may not be the right reason to vote yes. Best for business means best for the economy which means best for job creation. If someone had a fundamental objection to the treaty of course it wouldn't be a reason to vote yes but if someone had no real objection or wasn't sure which way to vote it could be a factor. For someone of the "if you don't know vote no" mindset, this shows that a no vote is not necessarily the "safe" option because the majority of experts agree it will make economic recovery more difficult.

In the absence of a compelling reason to vote no, a yes vote is appropriate

AARRRGH wrote: »

Long term I don't believe a Germany/France controlled Europe is best for Ireland.

Me neither but that's not happening here.

jacool

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

Tony, your OP is dishonest. I think it is appalling that you would attempt to mislead people.

I hope you never harp on about corruption or morality in Irish politics. You have displayed all the characteristics of the morally bankrupt politicians that have blighted our country. Shame on you.

Are these the same "morally bankrupt politicians" who are espousing a YES vote? Just want to check!

PopeBuckfastXVI

jacool wrote: »

Are these the same "morally bankrupt politicians" who are espousing a YES vote? Just want to check!

Some are for 'yes' some are for 'no'...

Sam Vimes

jacool wrote: »

Are these the same "morally bankrupt politicians" who are espousing a YES vote? Just want to check!

I don't understand why people get so hung up on what our government thinks of this treaty, it's not like they care what they think on any other matter. This is not their treaty, they are just one of many groups that support it. If you don't trust them to tell you about it, ask someone else. Here are a list of some groups that support the treaty:

Progressive Democrats
IBEC
Irish Farmers Association
Irish Sheep and Cattle Farmers Association
ICMSA
Alliance for Europe
Concern
Barnado's
Trocaire
Irish Congress of Trade Unions
American Chamber of Commerce
Construction Industry Federation (CIF)
Consumer Electronic Distributors Association (CEDA)
Cork Chamber of Commerce
Cork City Business Association
Dublin Chamber of Commerce
Dublin City Business Association
Fashion & Footwear Federation
Financial Services Ireland
Galway City Business Association
ICT Ireland
Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland
Institute of Professional Auctioneers and Valuers
Irish Banking Federation
Irish Dairy Industry Association (IDIA)
Irish Exporters Association (IEA)
Irish Franchise Association
Irish Hardware & Building Materials Association
Irish Hotels Federation (IHF)
Irish Medical Devices Association (IMDA)
Irish Software Association (ISA)
Irish Tourist Industry Confederation (ITIC)
Irish Travel Agents Association (ITAA)
Limerick Chamber of Commerce
Limerick City Business Association
Network Dublin
North Dublin Chamber of Commerce
Pharmachemical Ireland
Retail Ireland
Small Firms Association (SFA)
Society of Irish Motor Industry (SIMI)
South Dublin Chamber
Telecoms and Internet Federation (TIF)
Waterford Chamber of Commerce
Concern(NGO)



Concern :eek: I wonder what's in it for those devious bastards!!

Euro_Kraut

jacool wrote: »

Are these the same "morally bankrupt politicians" who are espousing a YES vote? Just want to check!

Whataboutery

SkepticOne

AARRRGH wrote: »

Come on, obviously people with an interest in business will want a yes vote. But is "best for business" the right reason to vote yes? I don't believe it is.

Long term I don't believe a Germany/France controlled Europe is best for Ireland.

I think you need to take it into account in your voting, just like you need to take into account the effect on domestic politics of a yes or no vote. I'm not sure, though, that it should be your predominant reason for voting one way or the other.

AARRRGH

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Me neither but that's not happening here.

History would tell us it is what's happening.

I know we like to believe we live in enlightened times, but if you pick up any history book you will see both those countries have been trying to take over Europe for centuries.

I don't see why now should be any different. And the way Europe is going (e.g. France/Germany having more voting power because of their large populations) it would appear nothing has changed.

smokingman

AARRRGH wrote: »

I don't see why now should be any different. And the way Europe is going (e.g. France/Germany having more voting power because of their large populations) it would appear nothing has changed.

To vote something in post Lisbon, it would need 65% of the population of Europe AND ALSO at least 8 countries agreeing with it...that last bit is always left out by the no side...:rolleyes:

K-9

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I don't understand why people get so hung up on what our government thinks of this treaty, it's not like they care what they think on any other matter. This is not their treaty, they are just one of many groups that support it. If you don't trust them to tell you about it, ask someone else. Here are a list of some groups that support the treaty:

Progressive Democrats
IBEC
Irish Farmers Association
Irish Sheep and Cattle Farmers Association
ICMSA
Alliance for Europe
Concern
Barnado's
Trocaire
Irish Congress of Trade Unions
American Chamber of Commerce
Construction Industry Federation (CIF)
Consumer Electronic Distributors Association (CEDA)
Cork Chamber of Commerce
Cork City Business Association
Dublin Chamber of Commerce
Dublin City Business Association
Fashion & Footwear Federation
Financial Services Ireland
Galway City Business Association
ICT Ireland
Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland
Institute of Professional Auctioneers and Valuers
Irish Banking Federation
Irish Dairy Industry Association (IDIA)
Irish Exporters Association (IEA)
Irish Franchise Association
Irish Hardware & Building Materials Association
Irish Hotels Federation (IHF)
Irish Medical Devices Association (IMDA)
Irish Software Association (ISA)
Irish Tourist Industry Confederation (ITIC)
Irish Travel Agents Association (ITAA)
Limerick Chamber of Commerce
Limerick City Business Association
Network Dublin
North Dublin Chamber of Commerce
Pharmachemical Ireland
Retail Ireland
Small Firms Association (SFA)
Society of Irish Motor Industry (SIMI)
South Dublin Chamber
Telecoms and Internet Federation (TIF)
Waterford Chamber of Commerce
Concern(NGO)



Concern :eek: I wonder what's in it for those devious bastards!!

Cheers, I was actually looking for a list. I'm sure we could add more.

SIPTU,
ICTU,
INO

It's amazing that so many groups that often are polar opposites on issues, support Lisbon.

AARRRGH

smokingman wrote: »

To vote something in post Lisbon, it would need 65% of the population of Europe AND ALSO at least 8 countries agreeing with it...that last bit is always left out by the no side...:rolleyes:

So Ireland could vote against something every single time and still lose?

Wow, that sounds like a great deal for Ireland...

PopeBuckfastXVI

smokingman wrote: »

To vote something in post Lisbon, it would need 65% of the population of Europe AND ALSO at least 8 countries agreeing with it...that last bit is always left out by the no side...:rolleyes:

Actually it would require a minimum of 15 countries, were there no further expansion (more countries would be required if it expanded).

PopeBuckfastXVI

AARRRGH wrote: »

So Ireland could vote against something every single time and still lose?

Wow, that sounds like a great deal for Ireland...

Also, Ireland could vote for something every single time and win even if some countries objected.

Now that does sound like a good deal for Ireland...

AARRRGH

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Also, Ireland could vote for something every single time and win even if some countries objected.

Now that does sound like a good deal for Ireland...

I think it is likely the larger countries won't want the same things as Ireland.

For example, low corporation tax.

Sam Vimes

AARRRGH wrote: »

History would tell us it is what's happening.

I know we like to believe we live in enlightened times, but if you pick up any history book you will see both those countries have been trying to take over Europe for centuries.

I don't see why now should be any different.

History would tell us that a union like this would have collapsed long ago as the League of Nations did.

AARRRGH wrote: »

And the way Europe is going (e.g. France/Germany having more voting power because of their large populations) it would appear nothing has changed.

Them having a higher voting weight for the population requirement because of their population is democracy. There is also the country requirement which gives us the same voting weight as them and requires 15 countries to agree. There is also the clause that if only the three biggest countries are opposed to a change they can't block it. Have a look at this. It shows that if the big countries wanted to force their will on the smaller ones it would take 15 of them (the bare minimum for QMV), those being Germany, the UK, France, Spain, Poland, Italy, Romania, The Netherlands, Greece, Portugal, Belgium, Czech Republic, Hungary, Sweden and Austria, and they would represent 88.6% of the population of the EU.

Also take a look at this post from Scofflaw which shows that our composite voting weight increases slightly under Lisbon:

Scofflaw wrote: »

It's been pointed out repeatedly that this is false. We have two voting weights under Lisbon - population (0.8%) and 1 state vote (3.7%). Under Nice, we have three voting weights - population (0.8%), 1 state vote (3.7%), and negotiated votes (7/349 = 2%). The comparison being made by the No campaigns is of the negotiated vote to the population vote - but one is not being replaced by the other. Our composite voting weight under Nice is 2.167% (0.8+2+3.7/3), our composite voting weight under Lisbon is 2.25% (0.8+3.7/2).

If France and Germany are trying to dominate the EU, they're not doing a very good job of it

K-9

AARRRGH wrote: »

I think it is likely the larger countries won't want the same things as Ireland.

For example, low corporation tax.

That is why they'll need the support of other small countries. You know, the ones that make up the majority of the EU.