Bertie the champion of the world

Laminations

This thread is to debate the man and not FF as a whole. Good and bad points on his character (with references to factual sources) and a debate as to his suitability for President.

I'll start off with my opinion that his behaviour at the Mahon tribunal was unbecoming of a Taoiseach.

Source
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/17-hours-in-witness-box-still-no-answers-1088078.html

His Legacy according to wikipedia

Historian John A Murphy said: "Did Ahern, in his 11 years of power, make the most of this unprecedented prosperity for the public benefit? The answer can hardly be positive, given the present state of health, education and infrastructure, generally."[124]
Historian Diarmaid Ferriter said: "There'll be broad consensus around what Bertie did in Northern Ireland, the social partnership and the unity he brought to his own party. Also, he made Fianna Fáil the permanent party of government. They used to have all of the power most of the time, but now they have most of the power all of the time. All of that takes skill. But I wonder will people talk about 'Ahernism'? Is there any such thing? What does he actually stand for? In some ways Bertie's lack of vision was a positive, it made him flexible and willing to compromise, and he was certainly outstanding in that regard. But I dissent from the universal plaudits going around at the moment. He had no social or economic vision for the state he led. There was no fire in his belly. He didn't really want to change society for the better. He was the ward boss writ large. But at the moment it seems it's unfashionable to say anything adverse about Bertie."[125]
Stephen Collins noted that: "None of his colleagues is really sure whether he is possessed of all the deviousness and cunning attributed to him by Haughey or whether he simply suffers from chronic indecision disguised as political shrewdness".
Ryanair chief executive Michael O'Leary noted in a radio interview that "Bertie squandered the wealth of a generation and I think in time it will be proven he was a useless wastrel."[126] In November 2009 Ahern was again criticised by O'Leary, being described as a "feckless ditherer

Sleepy

Any time I've spoken my mind on Ahern I've gotten an infraction so I'll just reiterate my very first argument against his being in politics which imho is still irrefutable:

He admitted to signing blank cheques for Haughey.

This made him either too stupid or too crooked to be involved in the running of a country.

Laminations

This quote from the article above highlights Berties 'head in the sand brass neck attitude', re-interpreting events to suit himself (much like his supporters

He dismissed opinion polls which showed that people did not believe the account he had given to the Mahon Tribunal.
"I don't think they did that. I think they said the party was in very good order and we're in good order," he said.

Laminations

I certainly dont want an infraction - I cant see how one can be issued for a factual debate of Bertie the man. I'll appeal to all to avoid name calling and although it may be justified please avoid hateful ranting

bijapos

History will judge him, probably unfavourably.

He lost it in my opinion the day he said at the tribunal that he won some money on the horses. I wonder myself what the inland revenue would do if every self employed person in this country claimed that unexplained monies were won at the local Paddy Power.

To me he was the leader in waiting and then leader of a crowd of scam artists who have made a joke of the way this country is run. Sadly the country will be administered for the foreseeable future by those who benefitted from shady dealings, be they public or private individuals, no matter what part of the political spectrum they come from.

I never liked the man, less so on the occasions when reasonable debate, warnings and objections to FF policies were greeted by his "begrudgers" and "go top themselves" remarks, why enter into serious debate when a few populist rants will do. He also claims to be a republican but writes for the News of the World, a paper which spent much of the 60's 70's 80's and 90's depicting the Irish as ignorant backward bombers. I suppose they turned his head with some cash too.

Red_Marauder

I disliked the leadership style of Ahern, I don't trust his account of financial irregularities as discussed in another thread, and I personally distrust him as a public figure. I just don't like his politics nor his methods and am uneasy about the allegations that still pervade.

But I am not so stupid, nor are lots of other posters, to suggest that his government didn't do a whole deal of good.

I was ten years old and in Primary school when Ahern came to power. When he quit I was 22 and in my final year of University. I enjoyed all of the benefits of the years of success that Fianna Fáil did have a serious part in.

The point is that all of this never, ever negates dishonesty or corruption in political life if indeed such allegations are proven. They are totally seperate issues.

In public life, small failures or perceived failures may overshadow an entire career - often with good reason.

Colm R

I don't respect the man. He was in charge when the Celtic Tiger stopped roaring in 2001/2. For the following 6 years, he created a psedo-tiger based on complete consumerism. The fundamentals were not sound in 2007, they had not been for 5 years but he chose to ignore, and direct his cabinet to ignore this issues.

I also don't respect him as he continually blames the collapse of Lehmans for the crisis we are in now. Lehmans did not help matters, but it was not responsible for our education, infrastructure and health problems.

Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone creates problems. Everyone can makes the problems worse by trying to cover over them. And everyone gains a bit of respect when they stand up and say they have done wrong. Even when a murderer admits guilt, you don't respect the crime or the mans actions. But you respect the man for standing up and admitting responsibilty and going to pay his debt to society.

Darsad

This is an impossible topic to debate there is no debating Ahern we all know what he is and what he did and for who . Who here could possibly defend this man, in my opinion even his participation in the northern peace process was a self serving sham and something he hoped to live off after his days as taoiseach

Liam Byrne

His actions, and the state of the country, speak for themselves.

Any actual corruption or otherwise aside, he screwed up the country and condoned and excused the corruption of others, and doesn't know the meaning of the word "responsibility" unless he's being praised for the occasional decent thing that he achieved.

Haughey's cheques, looking into Burke's corruption, his own finances, accepting Cooper-Flynn back, excusing Lawlor, fuelling the boom, no social conscience, no straight answers, no vision of a modern and fair Ireland, licking arses of influential while shafting the normal folk, and the two-faced sham persona. Right down to him writing a book while on our payroll (no baseline welfare sick-day pay for him) and using our ministerial car, petrol and driver to swan around promoting his work of fiction.

That's the summary version, because despite getting dragged into the fiasco on boards that FF apologists claim is "bashing", even though it's simply stating facts, I don't even think the guy is worth discussing......I'll challenge the half-truths and tactics used to make him look better, but I cannot list off everything I hate about this slimy weasel and what he represents because I'd depress myself and everyone else here.

Laminations

Where are the Bertie supporters? I dont want you to feel like you are walking into the lions den here, if you have facts about the man that highlight his good points and you believe his good points outweigh his bad (or can dispute his bad points) then please post.

If you're not willing to whole-heartedly defend/support him here then dont half-heartedly do it in other threads

anymore

One of the curious things about Ahern's career are the questions that havent been or put to him.
For example, whilst he has been given great credit for his invlovement in the North (- more about this later), few people have questioned him about the deadly war being waged on the innocent public by the murderous drug gangs in the Republic. Some of the more dangerous of theses gangs effectivley took control of some areas of Limerick, the home city of Ahern's great ally and defender, Willie O Dea. Do innocent people gunned down by criminals in the Republic merit less sympathy or attention than innocent people murdered in the North of Ireland. And did Ahern not owe a greater duty of care to the innocent victims of gangland violence in the Republic than he did to the victims in Northern Ireland ? Yet drug gangland violence merited far less attention than the Peace talks in the North.
Of course the media might ask that question of themselves as much as of Ahern.

hallelujajordan

Laminations wrote: »

Where are the Bertie supporters? I dont want you to feel like you are walking into the lions den here, if you have facts about the man that highlight his good points and you believe his good points outweigh his bad (or can dispute his bad points) then please post.

If you're not willing to whole-heartedly defend/support him here then dont half-heartedly do it in other threads

jaysus, give us a chance man . . you've only had the thread up an hour . .

Such a spirited defence will take me a while to compile . . maybe later

ps. . enjoying your new role as back-seat-mod ?

Liam Byrne

anymore wrote: »

Some of the more dangerous of theses gangs effectivley took control of some areas of Limerick, the home city of Ahern's great ally and defender, Willie O Dea.

Bit of an exaggeration, tbh.....and there's a few that "effectively took control" of some areas of Ahern's own home city, too.

But I'd view that as a party failure (one of many), rather than Ahern's....as leader, yes, he takes some responsibility, but not as much as he does for his nepotistic appointment of his friend to Financial Regulator.

The crime issue is that John "Zero Tolerance" O'Donoghue was too busy spending money to follow through on his and his party's election promises.

Laminations

hallelujajordan wrote: »

enjoying your new role as back-seat-mod ?

I have no delusions of grandeur, I simply dont want the thread closed and I dont want a warning. I want a fact based debate

Liam Byrne

Actually I can't believe that I left out self-confessed nepotism in my summary.

I didn't give them jobs because they gave me money; I gave them jobs because they were my friends

Qualifications or suitability not required - just be Bertie's "friend" and you'll get a job where you don't do anything and then get paid off to leave.

And we all know where that got us.

Scofflaw

Laminations wrote: »

I have no delusions of grandeur, I simply dont want the thread closed and I dont want a warning. I want a fact based debate

The thread will only be closed if it stops being about politics and becomes a repetitive barrage of trash-talking (and/or potentially libellous material) - as per the thread on Dan Boyle.

moderately,
Scofflaw

anymore

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Bit of an exaggeration, tbh.....and there's a few that "effectively took control" of some areas of Ahern's own home city, too.

But I'd view that as a party failure (one of many), rather than Ahern's....as leader, yes, he takes some responsibility, but not as much as he does for his nepotistic appointment of his friend to Financial Regulator.

The crime issue is that John "Zero Tolerance" O'Donoghue was too busy spending money to follow through on his and his party's election promises.

Well to use that old saying ' the buck stops at the top'. The Taoiseach of the day appoints the Ministers and ultimately decides on the priorities and allocates the resources. This is a question that could be asked of other Taoiseach as well of course, but as Ahern was in power for so long and so recently, it is appropriate to ask it of him. Below is a link to an article in the Guardian in Feb 2007 about drugs and crime in ' Stab City' :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/02/ukcrime.prisonsandprobation

In the second last paragraph, you will see the reference to the lack of resources:
" claims that police units are not being provided with the resources needed to combat the increasingly well-armed gangs they encounter on the streets "

Liam Byrne

anymore wrote: »

Well to use that old saying ' the buck stops at the top'. The Taoiseach of the day appoints the Ministers and ultimately decides on the priorities and allocates the resources. This is a question that could be asked of other Taoiseach as well of course, but as Ahern was in power for so long and so recently, it is appropriate to ask it of him.

I would agree for the most part.

anymore wrote: »

Below is a link to an article in the Guardian in Feb 2007 about drugs and crime in ' Stab City' :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/02/ukcrime.prisonsandprobation

I don't doubt that there's a lack of resources in many areas, but to be honest, there's no point in posting that link.

Any so-called "newspaper" that uses that pathetic, misleading and derogatory slur of a colloqualism as part of a headline is tabloid gutter press, and I have no intention of wasting my time on it.

And that's assuming that it even is about Limerick, considering the URL includes "ukcrime.prisonsandprobation"; I guess the UK gutter press still views Ireland as part of the UK.

rubensni

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Any so-called "newspaper" that uses that pathetic, misleading and derogatory slur of a colloqualism as part of a headline is tabloid gutter press, and I have no intention of wasting my time on it.

And that's assuming that it even is about Limerick, considering the URL includes "ukcrime.prisonsandprobation"; I guess the UK gutter press still views Ireland as part of the UK.

The story featured in the national (i.e. UK) news section in the Guardian website because that's where it was printed in the newspaper on that day, and when looked at in its context it makes sense that it was located there. It is categorised under world news now, if you look at the website again.

But that doesn't matter, does it Liam? Sure it's all the Brits fault. That's it blame the Brits. Much easier. They raped the country for 800 years, etc. Feckin' Brits.

skelliser

I cant trust a man who cant produce a P60 and hopefully soon a P45!!

Liam Byrne

rubensni wrote: »

But that doesn't matter, does it Liam? Sure it's all the Brits fault. That's it blame the Brits. Much easier. They raped the country for 800 years, etc. Feckin' Brits.

:rolleyes: LMAO! I deal in facts, and you're so far off the mark you've gone all the way round the world and probably hit it again!

Sure FF and their buddies raped us more than "the Brits".

Disclaimer : Hope we're allowed use "that word" in that non-literal context

Mind you, it seems like a normal, average Irish person can't win these days......you spout the above rubbish, while elsewhere I'm called a "WB" that has SFA to do with cartoons!

I guess that means I'm well-balanced and objective, so! Happy Days!

As for the link, maybe I was off-the-mark as to the reason for the UK in the website URL, but like I said I saw the title of the target page appear, saw that they're obviously not interested in realistic headlines or facts, and shut it down, so therefore I didn't get to see if there was a "World News" header on that page; those two combined made me comment on both.

But I really can't understand your attack and OTT reaction to what are simply the facts. Simply pointing out the fact that "Ireland isn't in the UK" - which I would do if I were dealing with half of the so-called celebs and contributors on Irish radio and TV - does not warrant a diatribe about "the Brits" and "800 years" and other rubbish similar to what you posted above. :rolleyes:

rubensni

Liam Byrne wrote: »

:rolleyes: LMAO! I deal in facts, and I'm about as far from that attitude that you're superimposing on me as I could possibly be!!!! You're so far off the mark you've gone all the way round the world and probably hit it again!

For a fella who deals in facts you sure spent the last post moaning about a source. Anyone who would categorise the Guardian as part of the gutter press is deluding themselves and that's why I made those comments.

Liam Byrne

rubensni wrote: »

For a fella who deals in facts you sure spent the last post moaning about a source. Anyone who would categorise the Guardian as part of the gutter press is deluding themselves and that's why I made those comments.

Yes, obviously! Because if a source can't be arsed use the city's name, and instead uses the label that the uninformed who've never visited the city use, then it puts a question mark over their reports.

And there was no excuse for those comments, but I don't care, because they were so far wrong and such an over-reaction that they were ridiculous.

Anyway - this thread is about Ahern.

Biggins

I have said a fair bit about him and still could but all I will say now, is a quote from the "Western People" July 01, 2009 - Link HERE :

He is powerless to rewrite history and the best he can do is hope his involvement in the Northern Peace Process spares him the ignominy of being described as Ireland’s worst ever Taoiseach.

LifesgoodwithLG

His timing was impeccable in getting out thats the only positive thing I can say about this crook.

trapsagenius

Darsad wrote: »

This is an impossible topic to debate there is no debating Ahern we all know what he is and what he did and for who . Who here could possibly defend this man, in my opinion even his participation in the northern peace process was a self serving sham and something he hoped to live off after his days as taoiseach

Yet another "Bertie Ahern was the worst Taoiseach ever and thats that!" childish response(which I've come to expect on this forum tbh).And how could you possibly label his work in NI as "a self serving sham".I'm sure it had nothing to do with getting peace in the north after 30 years and preventing innocent people dying:rolleyes:.You're anti-Ahern sentiment has clearly blinded you.

BTW, i started a similar thread about Bertie.Didn't get very positive reponses either.

Anyway, Bertie presided over a peroiod of unprecedented economic growth and established peace in NI.And i always believe that a poor Taoiseach will never win 3 elections in a row.So, i'm still happy with the job he did.
*awaits outraged responses*

Liam Byrne

trapsagenius wrote: »

BTW, i started a similar thread about Bertie.Didn't get very positive reponses either.

Would that not give you the hint that lots of people hate the guy, and have damn good reasons for that ?

Odd that the only thing you latched on to was the one post that didn't give a reason; mind you, your blind loyalty probably means that you didn't even see all the other posts.

trapsagenius wrote: »

Anyway, Bertie presided over a peroiod of unprecedented economic growth and established peace in NI.

The "unprecedented economic growth" was based on a false, doomed-to-fail economy.

As has been explained to you previously, his finishing off of the process in Northern Ireland was a plus, but it doesn't negate all the damage that he did.

I mean, even the priests that abused kids did some good along the way somewhere; but they're still scum.

And before you trot out the usual diversionary mock-indignation that I'm somehow comparing him to a paedophile, which is the usual tactic employed to deflect from the facts raised.

He did a few OK things, one decent thing, and presided over serious damage and embedded the culture of corruption by not being a proper leader and saying "we're not putting up with any of that crap".

Unfortunately the equally childish "I like Bertie and that's that", and "I'll repeat his one good point and ignore all the other stuff" is your opinion; it's disagreed with by most, thankfully, but you're entitled to keep it as long as you don't ridicule all of the other valid opinions.

There's loads of other posts above with all of the facts as to why people reckon he's a weasel, and not one of them is unreasonable.

trapsagenius

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Would that not give you the hint that lots of people hate the guy, and have damn good reasons for that ?

Odd that the only thing you latched on to was the one post that didn't give a reason; mind you, your blind loyalty probably means that you didn't even see all the other posts.



The "unprecedented economic growth" was based on a false, doomed-to-fail economy.

As has been explained to you previously, his finishing off of the process in Northern Ireland was a plus, but it doesn't negate all the damage that he did.

I mean, even the priests that abused kids did some good along the way somewhere; but they're still scum.

And before you trot out the usual diversionary mock-indignation that I'm somehow comparing him to a paedophile, which is the usual tactic employed to deflect from the facts raised.

He did a few OK things, one decent thing, and presided over serious damage and embedded the culture of corruption by not being a proper leader and saying "we're not putting up with any of that crap".

Unfortunately the equally childish "I like Bertie and that's that", and "I'll repeat his one good point and ignore all the other stuff" is your opinion; it's disagreed with by most, thankfully, but you're entitled to keep it as long as you don't ridicule all of the other valid opinions.

There's loads of other posts above with all of the facts as to why people reckon he's a weasel, and not one of them is unreasonable.

You accuse me of "blind loyalty" despite the fact that in thread after thread you've tried to steer the debate onto an "I HATE FF.DO YOU?IF YOU DONT YOU'RE STUPID!" topic which shows your blind loyalty to the opposition.

And just because you tried to get me to not comment on the fact you compared him to a paedophile doesn't mean i won't -there is absolutely no need for such comparisions.

And lets just gloss over the fact he acheived peace in NI where leader after leader (on both sides of the Irish sea) had failed.And the fact that there wasn't too many people complaining during the years where money was plentiful.

And where did i ridicule "valid opinions"?(Because you would NEVER do that right:rolleyes:?)

Liam Byrne

trapsagenius wrote: »

You accuse me of "blind loyalty" despite the fact that in thread after thread you've tried to steer the debate onto an "I HATE FF.DO YOU?IF YOU DONT YOU'RE STUPID!" topic which shows your blind loyalty to the opposition.

:rolleyes: I have absolutely no party affiliation or loyalty, and I have criticised FG for shooting themselves in the foot by not dealing with the JOD fiasco properly.

trapsagenius wrote: »

And just because you tried to get me to not comment on the fact you compared him to a paedophile doesn't mean i won't -there is absolutely no need for such comparisions.

:rolleyes: I did not compare Ahern to a paedophile. I said that everyone does some good. But, as expected, you ignored what was being said and chose to use it against me.

trapsagenius wrote: »

And lets just gloss over the fact he acheived peace in NI where leader after leader (on both sides of the Irish sea) had failed.And the fact that there wasn't too many people complaining during the years where money was plentiful.

:rolleyes: I'm not "glossing over" that - if you bothered to read, my post said

Liam Byrne wrote: »

As has been explained to you previously, his finishing off of the process in Northern Ireland was a plus, but it doesn't negate all the damage that he did.

trapsagenius wrote: »

And where did i ridicule "valid opinions"?(Because you would NEVER do that right:rolleyes:?)

Well, if someone can acknowledge ALL of the facts and not make ridiculous claims and red herrings when discussing them, I might take their opinion seriously. I'd still disagree, obviously, but I wouldn't ridicule.

But since you're claiming that I have "opposition loyalty" and other such rubbish :rolleyes:, I don't really need to ridicule your posts - you're kinda doing that yourself by making those claims.

Anyways, I'm going to butt out of this thread now, regardless of what you claim from now on, because if it gets closed due to bickering we won't get to read other people's opinions of our disgraced former Taoiseach.

trapsagenius

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Would that not give you the hint that lots of people hate the guy, and have damn good reasons for that ?

Odd that the only thing you latched on to was the one post that didn't give a reason; mind you, your blind loyalty probably means that you didn't even see all the other posts.



The "unprecedented economic growth" was based on a false, doomed-to-fail economy.

As has been explained to you previously, his finishing off of the process in Northern Ireland was a plus, but it doesn't negate all the damage that he did.

I mean, even the priests that abused kids did some good along the way somewhere; but they're still scum.

And before you trot out the usual diversionary mock-indignation that I'm somehow comparing him to a paedophile, which is the usual tactic employed to deflect from the facts raised.

He did a few OK things, one decent thing, and presided over serious damage and embedded the culture of corruption by not being a proper leader and saying "we're not putting up with any of that crap".

Unfortunately the equally childish "I like Bertie and that's that", and "I'll repeat his one good point and ignore all the other stuff" is your opinion; it's disagreed with by most, thankfully, but you're entitled to keep it as long as you don't ridicule all of the other valid opinions.

There's loads of other posts above with all of the facts as to why people reckon he's a weasel, and not one of them is unreasonable.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

:rolleyes: 1 I have absolutely no party affiliation or loyalty, and I have criticised FG for shooting themselves in the foot by not dealing with the JOD fiasco properly.



2:rolleyes: I did not compare Ahern to a paedophile. I said that everyone does some good. But, as expected, you ignored what was being said and chose to use it against me.



3 I'm not "glossing over" that - if you bothered to read, my post said





Well, if someone can acknowledge ALL of the facts and not make ridiculous claims and red herrings when discussing them, I might take their opinion seriously.4 I'd still disagree, obviously, but I wouldn't ridicule.

But since you're claiming that I have "opposition loyalty" and other such rubbish :rolleyes:, I don't really need to ridicule your posts - you're kinda doing that yourself by making those claims.

Anyways, I'm going to butt out of this thread now, regardless of what you claim from now on, because if it gets closed due to bickering we won't get to read other people's opinions of our disgraced former Taoiseach.

Jesus Christ, I don't even know where to start with that post!I''l try though.(again underlined parts are my own additions)
1.Well its fantastic that you can criticise FG for one thing isn't it?:rolleyes:.I'll admit that maybe "anti-FF bias" would have been a more apt description though.But you surely accept that you have attempted to turn many threads into an anti FF/Bertie rant, don't you?

2.So comparing Ahern to child abusing priests isn't comparing him to paedophiles is it:rolleyes:?(Liam, a paedophile is someone who abuses children)

3.Unfortunately for you, one (half) sentence saying"his finishing off of the process in NI was a plus" amounts to glossing over.After all the damage Bruton did, he wasn't exactly "finishing off". You're glossing over what a massive and momentous achievement it was.

4.Again, where did i ridicule?

I know you said you'd butt and i accept that.So you can reply whenever.I'd say i better butt out myself,tbh.

Liam Byrne

trapsagenius wrote: »

I'll admit that maybe "anti-FF bias" would have been a more apt description though.But you surely accept that you have attempted to turn many threads into an anti FF/Bertie rant, don't you?

No. I've expressed my disgust at their actions (for good reason, all down to them) and I've challenged those who post ridiculous comments such as "vote sensibly, not in anger" as if those two were mutually exclusive, and I've challenged posts that say that "when" Ahern is found innocent, he'll be suitable as president (i.e. as if the tribunal's judgement within it's specific terms of reference absolve him of everything).

The same people tend to object to the above factual analysis based on track record, despite throwing out ridiculous claims that FG will be worse, with no track record to judge on.

If people didn't make claims that need to be challenged, then I wouldn't mention the guy; I'd actually prefer that he didn't exist and that we didn't feed his ego by discussing him.

trapsagenius wrote: »

2.So comparing Ahern to child abusing priests isn't comparing him to paedophiles is it:rolleyes:?

Repeat this one and I'll report you. I did not compare Ahern to child abusing priests. I said that "even child abusing priests have done some good". FACT. So lay off this angle immediately.

trapsagenius wrote: »

3.Unfortunately for you, one (half) sentence saying"his finishing off of the process in NI was a plus" amounts to glossing over.After all the damage Bruton did, he wasn't exactly "finishing off". You're glossing over what a massive and momentous achievement it was.

And you're glossing over what a monumental achievement screwing up an entire economy was; hell, you're not even referring to it, as if it never happened. You also don't seem to accept that as leader of a party he should not have encouraged and condoned corruption by rewarding those involved.

At least I mentioned his achievement and acknowledged it.

If you want to start acknowledging all of the damage, then I'll look into how much of an influence Ahern was in the peace process. But until then, I'll err on the side of using your tactic.

Even if I did fully acknowledge this amazing, single-handed, massive and momentous achievement - it does not negate the damage that he did.

trapsagenius wrote: »

4.Again, where did i ridicule?

Well, for starters, claims like the above are an attempt to undermine the person making a point, and are ridiculous.

I'm not sure off-hand whether the "vote sensibly, not in anger" statement was yours, if not then I'll retract some of the above.

But writing off genuine concerns with claims of it being "blind loyalty to FG" (incorrect) or "a rant" (incorrect), and expecting people to ignore the facts and the track record of FF and Ahern when discussing him (by dismissing it as a rant) is "ridiculing", as if it were somehow unreasonable to do any of this.

Claiming that Ahern will be clear of all wrong-doing and suitable as president if the tribunal finds him innocent of what's in their narrow terms of reference is misleading and patronising, and again ridicules genuine concerns and observations.

It's an informed opinion, and if it's against Ahern it's because of his own track record, actions and those of his party.

Biggins

trapsagenius wrote: »

[/B]...Anyway, Bertie presided over a peroiod of unprecedented economic growth and established peace in NI. And i always believe that a poor Taoiseach will never win 3 elections in a row.So, i'm still happy with the job he did.
*awaits outraged responses*

I'll give you a response form the European IMF and a newspaper report - some of which I quoted earlier:

IT’S unlikely that Bertie Ahern has a copy of the IMF’s damning indictment of the Irish economy on his bedside table. Indeed, if the former Taoiseach were to use the report for nocturnal reading material it’s highly probable he would have nightmares for the rest of the year, because the IMF report is a stinging analysis of Ahern’s lengthy period as leader of this country.


...the Government was attempting to cling to the notion that Ireland had been sucked into the global economic vortex created by the collapse of the American bank, Lehman Brothers. The impression Brian Cowen and others were attempting to manufacture - albeit unsuccessfully - was of little old Ireland as a victim of wretched international economic circumstances. But the IMF didn’t buy that line; in its story we are the authors of our own misfortune. And Bertie Ahern, as Taoiseach for most of the boom period, is the man who must shoulder the lion’s share of the blame.

Ahern will ultimately be judged by the writers of history as a leader who failed to govern. The IMF report points to a glaring lack of accountability in the Ahern administration; a failure to regulate that cascaded from the top to the very bottom of the political and financial system. If Government is supposed to act as a watchdog on behalf of the public than Ahern’s successive administrations were little more than poodles in their dealings with corporate Ireland - if that isn’t an insult to the poodle community. There was no governance; there was no regulation; there was no accountability.

The IMF report identifies 2002 as the year when everything began to turn sour. Up to then Ireland had built a strong, vibrant economy on foreign-direct investment; property prices had increased steadily, but not at the alarming rates that were to be seen in the next five years. But everything changed after 2002.

Many intelligent people bought into the property boom in a manner that was utterly astounding. I have heard of sane, smart people who purchased two, three and four overpriced houses in the mistaken belief that there would be a rental market for ever more. The notion that rents might fall or that the value of the houses could drop - even slightly - was not considered. These are the same people who are now facing financial ruin. Their biggest mistake was to listen to people like Bertie Ahern when they told them that everything was going to be alright; that the worst we could expect was a “soft landing” as we fell from the property ladder.


Ahern’s failure to regulate the property and building industry will, ultimately, dominate his legacy as Taoiseach. It doesn’t matter what else he achieved or failed to achieve during his time in office - when it came to the big issue of the day (i.e. the property bubble) he was incapable of acting decisively. Not only did he not act, Ahern heightened public expectations that the boom would last forever by encouraging young people to invest in the 100 per cent mortgages that have become their ruination.

The IMF report is as bad as it gets from Ahern’s point of view.


He is powerless to rewrite history and the best he can do is hope his involvement in the Northern Peace Process spares him the ignominy of being described as Ireland’s worst ever Taoiseach.

Hows that for an outraged response?
Does a damning European IMF report qualify! :mad:

...and thats without getting started about his many blank cheques,
...without remembering about his bad memory at convenient times at a tribunal!
...giving homes to ex's with strange "loans" arranged with feck all paperwork (see "Primetime" report about two months ago)
...money "donated" to him at English meets in envelopes
...mysterious horse racing wins!
...his undeclared payments
...his (still ongoing) tax problems
...his many mysterious sterling cash lodgements
...his dealings with the now notorious "the Drumcondra Mafia" (Book)
...his strange "No Irish bank account" revelation
...his supposed mystery money from a developer (€63,300, from a property developer, Owen O'Callaghan)
...his payment to refurbish property managed by Celia Larkin
...besides money actually given to Celia Larkin
...self given pay-rises
...and on
...and on
...and on ...ALL ON RECORD that can be found covered by the Mahon tribunal and other reporting - again for example:

... Ahern's former girlfriend, for example, testified that he drove her to a bank in Dublin's O'Connell Street so she could nip in and withdraw £50,000 sterling in cash. There were examples of Ahern squirrelling money away. A businessman involved in a complicated house deal with Ahern told of taking 28 grand in a briefcase and heaping it on his desk. Ahern put the cash into a safe, without counting it – and without offering a receipt.
This was strange behaviour for a government minister: perhaps stranger still was the fact that although he was both an accountant and minister for finance, he did not have a bank account.

SOURCE

Anyone that still thinks that the sun shines out of this mans backside, is like a horse wearing convenient blinkers for gods sake!
Its time for the blind fools of this country to wake up and kop themselves on.
Time to see history as it is and not as Berties written it in his fiction self-PR spun biography.


...and the most sicken part is that the same blind, stupid fools will still try to elect this richer fool as President.
What public image he will be portraying of Ireland then for fcuks sake if elected!

In the words of Charles Haughey (who Bertie learned a hell of a lot from and trained under) famously said of him:
"He's the man. He's the best, the most skilful, the most devious and the most cunning of them all."

Eutow

trapsagenius wrote: »

[/B]

Yet another "Bertie Ahern was the worst Taoiseach ever and thats that!" childish response(which I've come to expect on this forum tbh).And how could you possibly label his work in NI as "a self serving sham".I'm sure it had nothing to do with getting peace in the north after 30 years and preventing innocent people dying:rolleyes:.You're anti-Ahern sentiment has clearly blinded you.

BTW, i started a similar thread about Bertie.Didn't get very positive reponses either.

Anyway, Bertie presided over a peroiod of unprecedented economic growth and established peace in NI. And i always believe that a poor Taoiseach will never win 3 elections in a row.So, i'm still happy with the job he did.
*awaits outraged responses*

All that proves is how gullible a lot of the electorate is, or more importantly his Drumcondra constituency. They are the ones that kept electing him, and if the entire electorate had a chance to directly elect the Taoiseach - which I would like to see written into the Constitution - I don't think he would have become Taoiseach. There are a lot of diluded people who think he is a man of the people because he likes his football and likes his pints - (pure bulls**t), and actually believe that if he was still in power we would not be in/get out of this mess quicker.

View

Laminations wrote: »

This thread is to debate the man and not FF as a whole. Good and bad points on his character (with references to factual sources) and a debate as to his suitability for President.

Personally, I'd suspect that he'd poll strongly even were an election to be held in the morning. Should there be any sign of an economic recovery his chances of winning would increase accordingly.

As to "suitability for President, I don't think it matters hugely. The President's role is so constrained a half-wit would be hard put to fail to fulfil the role properly.

wicklowwonder

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Repeat this one and I'll report you. I did not compare Ahern to child abusing priests. I said that "even child abusing priests have done some good". FACT. So lay off this angle immediately.

Liam you know my feelings towards Ahern from previous threads, however I could not let this pass. This is the third time you have mentioned Ahern and the actions of priests or "scandals in the Catholic Church" in the same post, every time you do it I or another poster brings it up you say oh I wasn't comparing the two, well as far as I am concerned you are trying to imply guilt my association, you are drawing comparisons between these two different events in Irish history, you may not mean to but you are, so if you wish for people to stop accusing you of comparing the two stop mentioning the priests in the same posts as Bertie Ahern. You also mentioned him and convicted murderers in the same post I believe. Report me if you please, I don’t care, I am just pointing out how you can solve your problem of accusations been thrown at you….

All I am going to say on this current thread is that the thing is people keep voting in FF election after election, we have democratic society and FF keep returning to power, they will return in the next election also I feel, people who are now giving out about Ahern in this Thread voted Fianna Fail in the last election and the one before that and the one before that and some I can guarantee will vote FF in the next election. There is no other alternative, every time it comes to an election the opposition shoot themselves in the foot and FF rally. Until FG get their act together and bring in Lee or Richard Brunton as Leader they will continue to falter at the last hurdle or before as we are seeing already with the latest opinion polls.

Shea O'Meara

View wrote: »

The President's role is so constrained a half-wit would be hard put to fail to fulfil the role properly.

This is not a thread about Brian Lenihan or Mary O'Rourke, please stay on topic.:D

anymore

Laminations wrote: »

This thread is to debate the man and not FF as a whole. Good and bad points on his character (with references to factual sources) and a debate as to his suitability for President.

I'll start off with my opinion that his behaviour at the Mahon tribunal was unbecoming of a Taoiseach.

Source
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/17-hours-in-witness-box-still-no-answers-1088078.html

His Legacy according to wikipedia

I thought we had more or less agreed that this thread would be used to debate Ahern's record so that other threads would not be diverted by continually going off on a tangent debating Ahern !

My remarks re Drug Wars etc was to focus on some law and order issues for which Ahern was directly responsible in contrast to his role in Northern Ireland where he was one of many politicians. In fact of the main players in the final years of negotiation, he was, I suggest, the one who would suffer least damage to his reputation if the negotiations went badly. Blair, and the Northern politicians, were dealing with a war in their own jurisdictions -the IRA war was in the UK and in the North. Ahern would not have been blamed if the negotiations faltered or failed.
In comparision to his predecessors, Lynch, Haughey, Cosgrove and Fitzgerald, he was working as Taoiseach in the period that the main players in the Provos had decided the military campaign could not succeed. All this is not to say he didnt play an important role, but there needs to be some perspective. To claim he brought peace to Northern Ireland, ignores the efforts of so. many others.
The one politician would took some of the greatest risks in trying to bring the Provos to the negotiating table - at a time when nobody wanted to be seen talking to the Provos - was John Hume who was excoriated by many people in the Republic who are Ahern's greatest supporters. Hume is almost the forgotten man of the Peace process now.
Questions also need to be asked if the Republic could have taken more stringent security measures to bring the provos to the negotiating table sooner,but that is probably outside of the scope of this thread.

Biggins

anymore wrote: »

...The one politician would took some of the greatest risks in trying to bring the Provos to the negotiating table - at a time when nobody wanted to be seen talking to the Provos - was John Hume...

Agreed.
Not wishing to sidetrack the thread but his role is under-acknowledged by the Irish history writers as far as I can see.
(Topic for another thread?)

Laminations

wicklowwonder wrote: »

All I am going to say on this current thread is that the thing is people keep voting in FF election after election, we have democratic society and FF keep returning to power, they will return in the next election also I feel, people who are now giving out about Ahern in this Thread voted Fianna Fail in the last election and the one before that and the one before that and some I can guarantee will vote FF in the next election. There is no other alternative, every time it comes to an election the opposition shoot themselves in the foot and FF rally. Until FG get their act together and bring in Lee or Richard Brunton as Leader they will continue to falter at the last hurdle or before as we are seeing already with the latest opinion polls.

Sorry but thats a complete cop out. All you are going to contribute to the debate is to say that 'people voted for Bertie' and suggest a hypothetical situation that people would vote for him again. How about you debate the points made by Biggins? How about you form an argument using references espousing Berties amazingness? How about rather than discussing opposition weaknesses and 'party' politics you stick to a debate of Bertie.

anymore

Laminations wrote: »

Sorry but thats a complete cop out. All you are going to contribute to the debate is to say that 'people voted for Bertie' and suggest a hypothetical situation that people would vote for him again. How about you debate the points made by Biggins? How about you form an argument using references espousing Berties amazingness? How about rather than discussing opposition weaknesses and 'party' politics you stick to a debate of Bertie.

Again this thread was set up in response to the people who objected to Ahern being focussed upon so much in threads lke the Presidential ones.
If there is little or no defence of Ahern, then I suggest that it is a case that it is because there is little defence to be offered.

Laminations

wicklowwonder wrote: »

people keep voting in FF election after election, we have democratic society and FF keep returning to power, they will return in the next election also I feel,

Battered wife syndrome

Sufferers often believe that the abuse is their fault

I'm still waiting with baited breath for a cogent, well referenced argument defending Bertie. Its a wonder people can suggest the man for president if they cannot reasonably defend him or at least refute the comments made in post #32.

From the UK - the 7 principles of public office
I cant find anything similar for Ireland

UltimateMale

Liam Byrne wrote: »

His actions, and the state of the country, speak for themselves.

Any actual corruption or otherwise aside, he screwed up the country and condoned and excused the corruption of others, and doesn't know the meaning of the word "responsibility" unless he's being praised for the occasional decent thing that he achieved.

Haughey's cheques, looking into Burke's corruption, his own finances, accepting Cooper-Flynn back, excusing Lawlor, fuelling the boom, no social conscience, no straight answers, no vision of a modern and fair Ireland, licking arses of influential while shafting the normal folk, and the two-faced sham persona. Right down to him writing a book while on our payroll (no baseline welfare sick-day pay for him) and using our ministerial car, petrol and driver to swan around promoting his work of fiction.

That's the summary version, because despite getting dragged into the fiasco on boards that FF apologists claim is "bashing", even though it's simply stating facts, I don't even think the guy is worth discussing......I'll challenge the half-truths and tactics used to make him look better, but I cannot list off everything I hate about this slimy weasel and what he represents because I'd depress myself and everyone else here.

Never read a better description of 'loveable' Bertie :mad:

" I hate about this slimy weasel and what he represents " That's exactly it, it's what he represents. He reperesents the corruption, cronyism and sheer hard neck of those who are supposed to run the country. They haven't got one single core value.

jmayo

Darsad wrote: »

This is an impossible topic to debate there is no debating Ahern we all know what he is and what he did and for who . Who here could possibly defend this man, in my opinion even his participation in the northern peace process was a self serving sham and something he hoped to live off after his days as taoiseach

Oh don't worry there are a few around who will defend him, one is even bothering to post from a beach in Oz.
Sure he was great for the party and won all those elections and that is all that matters. :rolleyes:

Actually I reckon a lot of people don't know the half of it.
Hopefully some day the full untefloned truth will come out and then people will really see bertie for what he is.

wicklowwonder wrote: »

Liam you know my feelings towards Ahern from previous threads, however I could not let this pass. This is the third time you have mentioned Ahern and the actions of priests or "scandals in the Catholic Church" in the same post, every time you do it I or another poster brings it up you say oh I wasn't comparing the two, well as far as I am concerned you are trying to imply guilt my association, you are drawing comparisons between these two different events in Irish history, you may not mean to but you are, so if you wish for people to stop accusing you of comparing the two stop mentioning the priests in the same posts as Bertie Ahern. You also mentioned him and convicted murderers in the same post I believe. Report me if you please, I don’t care, I am just pointing out how you can solve your problem of accusations been thrown at you….

Well he did give Catholic Church a free ride in 2002 which meant it would not face financial reparations for the crimes of it's representatives.
Funny that hinself and his minister (who publicly stated he always considered his catholic beliefs when making decisions) rushed that through before election :rolleyes:
Instead he conveniently dumped that bill on the Irish state i.e. taxpayers.
And yes before you get hot and bothered the Irish state were culpable for lots of the abuse as well.

No one has ever said he abused any children, but they are quesitoning a decision that benefitted the coffers of the church rather than those he was paid to be responsible for i.e. the Irish state coffers.

wicklowwonder wrote: »

All I am going to say on this current thread is that the thing is people keep voting in FF election after election, we have democratic society and FF keep returning to power, they will return in the next election also I feel, people who are now giving out about Ahern in this Thread voted Fianna Fail in the last election and the one before that and the one before that and some I can guarantee will vote FF in the next election. There is no other alternative, every time it comes to an election the opposition shoot themselves in the foot and FF rally. Until FG get their act together and bring in Lee or Richard Brunton as Leader they will continue to falter at the last hurdle or before as we are seeing already with the latest opinion polls.

Yeah battered wives often go back to their spouses but does that make it right ?

Please please never accuse me of voting for ahern or any of the other shysters that inhabit or have inhabited your beloved party.
I grew up watching haughey with the likes of flynn and I knew enough then to form an opinion on the ethics of ff.
I have seen nothing or learnt nothing in the past 30 years to have changed that opinion. :rolleyes:

There is no other alternative according to you. A lot of us beg to differ on that.

Shea O'Meara

jmayo wrote: »

Actually I reckon a lot of people don't know the half of it.
Hopefully some day the full untefloned truth will come out and then people will really see bertie for what he is.

Like with Haughey, they'll say that was then, we've cleaned house, quit bringing up the old days...then we'll have reason to accuse that current shower (as that is the FF track record) and so the circle of bull**** will continue....

anymore

I certainly want to state that I never for this dreadful man's Government and whats more when one of his Ministers knocked on my door at the last Council election, I left him know precisely that because he supported Ahern for so long, nothing would persuade me to vote for his brother.

trapsagenius

Liam Byrne wrote: »

No. I've expressed my disgust at their actions (for good reason, all down to them) and I've challenged those who post ridiculous comments such as "vote sensibly, not in anger" as if those two were mutually exclusive, and I've challenged posts that say that "when" Ahern is found innocent, he'll be suitable as president (i.e. as if the tribunal's judgement within it's specific terms of reference absolve him of everything).

The same people tend to object to the above factual analysis based on track record, despite throwing out ridiculous claims that FG will be worse, with no track record to judge on.

If people didn't make claims that need to be challenged, then I wouldn't mention the guy; I'd actually prefer that he didn't exist and that we didn't feed his ego by discussing him.

Repeat this one and I'll report you. I did not compare Ahern to child abusing priests. I said that "even child abusing priests have done some good". FACT. So lay off this angle immediately.



And you're glossing over what a monumental achievement screwing up an entire economy was; hell, you're not even referring to it, as if it never happened. You also don't seem to accept that as leader of a party he should not have encouraged and condoned corruption by rewarding those involved.

At least I mentioned his achievement and acknowledged it.

If you want to start acknowledging all of the damage, then I'll look into how much of an influence Ahern was in the peace process. But until then, I'll err on the side of using your tactic.

Even if I did fully acknowledge this amazing, single-handed, massive and momentous achievement - it does not negate the damage that he did.



Well, for starters, claims like the above are an attempt to undermine the person making a point, and are ridiculous.

I'm not sure off-hand whether the "vote sensibly, not in anger" statement was yours, if not then I'll retract some of the above.

But writing off genuine concerns with claims of it being "blind loyalty to FG" (incorrect) or "a rant" (incorrect), and expecting people to ignore the facts and the track record of FF and Ahern when discussing him (by dismissing it as a rant) is "ridiculing", as if it were somehow unreasonable to do any of this.

Claiming that Ahern will be clear of all wrong-doing and suitable as president if the tribunal finds him innocent of what's in their narrow terms of reference is misleading and patronising, and again ridicules genuine concerns and observations.

It's an informed opinion, and if it's against Ahern it's because of his own track record, actions and those of his party.

Let me clear up a few things:
1.I never once said "vote sensibly not in anger".You're confusing me for someone else.
2.I have not commented on any matters with regards the tribunal and don't intend to until the report is made.
3.I have retracted the comment about "blind loyalty"to FG.It was a stupid comment and I apologise.
4.With regards the paedophile comparision-its not the first time you have done this and while i acknowledge it was not a direct comparision, I would prefer if you ceased referencing Ahern and paedophile priests in the same posts.This link was probably unintended however, so we should just put this matter to bed.You can report me if you like, but I'm sure I have solid grounds.

Anyway,about the economy, I can see your point but I just happen to believe that the progress we made in his first term(and to a far lesser extent his second term)outweigh the negatives.That's just my opinion.

One more thing Liam-I would never set out to intentionally ridicule you or any other informed poster.While we disagree on many issues, I regard you as one of the most intelligent and informed posters on this forum, and I admire your convictions.If you feel that i have ridiculed you, I apologise, and assure you it was unintentional.

Liam Byrne

wicklowwonder wrote: »

Liam you know my feelings towards Ahern from previous threads, however I could not let this pass. This is the third time you have mentioned Ahern and the actions of priests or "scandals in the Catholic Church" in the same post, every time you do it I or another poster brings it up you say oh I wasn't comparing the two, well as far as I am concerned you are trying to imply guilt my association, you are drawing comparisons between these two different events in Irish history, you may not mean to but you are, so if you wish for people to stop accusing you of comparing the two stop mentioning the priests in the same posts as Bertie Ahern. You also mentioned him and convicted murderers in the same post I believe. Report me if you please, I don’t care, I am just pointing out how you can solve your problem of accusations been thrown at you….

And again, you're 100% wrong, but then I'm getting used to it at this stage.

There's a massive difference between saying that "even a paedophile priest did some good" - in the context of someone claiming that Ahern "did some good" - and claiming that "Ahern is like a paedophile" - which I did not do.

And if you can't see that, then it's not my problem.

How I can solve my problem of accusations being thrown at me, is by Ahern apologists ditching the attempts at sidetracking the decision.

And I find it HIGHLY ironic that you accuse me of this based on your own prejudices and bias, and yet use phrases like "when Ahern is found innocent".

The double-standards are stunning, but it's what I've come to expect from Ahern's supporters and FF supporters.

I'll let the mods take over from here, because the tactic of making Ahern out to be some poor unfortunate that is "bashed", and exaggerating and misrepresenting posts in a pathetic effort to make it seem like those discussing him are accusing him of all sorts and therefore just being unfair is draining, irritating and downright pathetic at this stage.

anymore

Just to lighten the mood a little, lifted this quote from P.ie

19 Sep 2008, Bertie Ahern:
"Bank of Ireland shares are € 3.80 today. Now if I meet you here next year, or the year after, do you seriously think Bank of Ireland shares will be € 3.80? I'd go out and buy Bank of Ireland shares . . . that's what I'd do."

Donie Cassidy, 10 April 2008 on house prices:
"Now is the right time to buy. I will remind the House, perhaps in 12 or 18 months, when prices have again increased by 25% or 30%

Biggins

anymore wrote: »

Just to lighten the mood a little, lifted this quote from P.ie

19 Sep 2008, Bertie Ahern:
"Bank of Ireland shares are € 3.80 today. Now if I meet you here next year, or the year after, do you seriously think Bank of Ireland shares will be € 3.80? I'd go out and buy Bank of Ireland shares . . . that's what I'd do."

Donie Cassidy, 10 April 2008 on house prices:
"Now is the right time to buy. I will remind the House, perhaps in 12 or 18 months, when prices have again increased by 25% or 30%

LOL
Them were the days...

Liam Byrne

Laminations wrote: »

Battered wife syndrome

FFS, Laminations, be careful!!! Based on the earlier false and bull**** accusations that I was hit with, some of the apologists are likely to suggest that you're implying that this is why Ahern's marriage broke up!

Liam Byrne

trapsagenius wrote: »

Let me clear up a few things:
1.I never once said "vote sensibly not in anger".You're confusing me for someone else.

Fair enough, and I apologise for saying that it might have been you; I did say at the time that I wasn't sure, and I couldn't find it.

trapsagenius wrote: »

2.I have not commented on any matters with regards the tribunal and don't intend to until the report is made.

While the tribunal finding will be welcome, Ahern's actions and the state of the economy have relegated this to second place. Some people have suggested that if he's found innocent, that all's OK and he's in favour again, which should not be the case as the terms of the tribunal are far too narrow and have nothing to do with a lot of other actions of his.

trapsagenius wrote: »

3.I have retracted the comment about "blind loyalty"to FG.It was a stupid comment and I apologise.

Apology accepted, but please be careful. Claiming that anyone who points out the facts and has weighed up FF's track record against a party that has had no links to corruption is automatically an FG supporter, let alone a blind one, will automatically undermine any valid point you might make. I have no party affiliation, and any comments that I make here are based on the facts, not on any political or party agenda.

trapsagenius wrote: »

4.With regards the paedophile comparision-its not the first time you have done this and while i acknowledge it was not a direct comparision, I would prefer if you ceased referencing Ahern and paedophile priests in the same posts.This link was probably unintended however, so we should just put this matter to bed.

There's no "probably" about it. I was just pointing out a scenario in which one good deed does not outweigh the damage done; the only "comparison" intended was in the sense that Ahern's success re the North does not outweigh the damage that he did.

trapsagenius wrote: »

Anyway,about the economy, I can see your point but I just happen to believe that the progress we made in his first term(and to a far lesser extent his second term)outweigh the negatives.That's just my opinion.

So I guess we'll just have to agree to differ on that.

trapsagenius wrote: »

One more thing Liam-I would never set out to intentionally ridicule you or any other informed poster.While we disagree on many issues, I regard you as one of the most intelligent and informed posters on this forum, and I admire your convictions.If you feel that i have ridiculed you, I apologise, and assure you it was unintentional.

I genuinely don't know what to say to this; I do try to be objective and give informed comment, and I don't pre-judge. FF's and Ahern's actions and track record, and the damage they have done, are the only reason I am against them. And I do believe that is a very valid stance, and "forgetting the past" is not just "punishment" - it's a belief that a leopard doesn't change its spots (especially if it can't even bring itself to see what's wrong with them) and that FF's actions are unacceptable.

But I appreciate your post and your comments (and also realise that the above long post completely undermines my "I don't know what to say" ).