Is Sean Gallagher telling lies

CDfm · 09-10-2011 10:15PM

irishdude11 wrote: »

It is not an argument about interpretation, that Bertie/Cowen/Lenihan style crap about semantics doesn't work any more. He said he was no longer involved since 2009. He was VERY involved up til Feb 2011, so involved that actually officially launched the election campaigns of several FF candidates.

Gilmoresque , I would say, but thats just semantics and shoundn't be a stickying point

jonniebgood1 · 09-10-2011 10:15PM

irishdude11 wrote: »

It is not an argument about interpretation, that Bertie/Cowen/Lenihan style crap about semantics doesn't work any more. He said he was no longer involved since 2009. He was VERY involved up til Feb 2011, so involved that actually officially launched the election campaigns of several FF candidates.

I am sorry but "VERY involved" including the capitols to emphasise 'very' is indeed your interpretation and is exactly the type of argument that I do not feel is worth pursuing as it is opinion based rather than factual.

irishdude11 · 09-10-2011 10:39PM

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

I am sorry but "VERY involved" including the capitols to emphasise 'very' is indeed your interpretation and is exactly the type of argument that I do not feel is worth pursuing as it is opinion based rather than factual.

You were originally looking for proof that he said he wasn't involved since 2009, you were given that proof and now you are trying to downplay it.

Its not an interpretation. Launching election campaigns is very active. 'Active', 'very active', whatever, Im going to get involved in a Cowen style argument over semantics. Fact is, he said hasn't been active with FF since 2009. That is a blatant lie as officially launching election campaigns for FF candidates means he was active.

irishdude11 · 09-10-2011 10:41PM

He threw his weight behind the candidates because he wanted to get them elected because they are FF members like him.

Explain how these two facts stack up -

1. Gallagher saying - I left any involvement in Fianna Fáil in terms of being a member of the party or being active back in 2009.
2. Gallagher officially launching the election campaigns of several FF TDs in 2011.

jonniebgood1 · 09-10-2011 11:14PM

irishdude11 wrote: »

Its not an interpretation. Launching election campaigns is very active. 'Active', 'very active', whatever, Im going to get involved in a Cowen style argument over semantics. Fact is, he said hasn't been active with FF since 2009. That is a blatant lie as officially launching election campaigns for FF candidates means he was active.

OK then- how is this not your interpretation.

I think a debate on interpretations is unnessesary. The thread is regarding lies and none have been clearly shown as of yet.

raymon · 09-10-2011 11:22PM

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

OK then- how is this not your interpretation.

I think a debate on interpretations is unnessesary. The thread is regarding lies and none have been clearly shown as of yet.

"active" and "involved" are simple words , let's not get out the dictionaries.

"Lie" is another simple word no need to explain here .

Your argument that he did not lie has no basis . Please provide some explanation.

Gallagher is a liar .

Proof has been provided of his statement
Proof has been provided that the facts don't support his statement .

irishdude11 · 09-10-2011 11:59PM

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

OK then- how is this not your interpretation.

I think a debate on interpretations is unnessesary. The thread is regarding lies and none have been clearly shown as of yet.

Here is a lie for you -

1. Gallagher saying - I left any involvement in Fianna Fáil in terms of being a member of the party or being active back in 2009.
2. Gallagher officially launching the election campaigns of several FF TDs in 2011.

CDfm · 10-10-2011 12:08AM

A possible explanation is that he was hired to do so.

http://www.carolandassociates.com/radio_tv.htm

Wolfe Tone · 10-10-2011 12:10AM

irishdude11 wrote: »

Here is a lie for you -

1. Gallagher saying - I left any involvement in Fianna Fáil in terms of being a member of the party or being active back in 2009.
2. Gallagher officially launching the election campaigns of several FF TDs in 2011.

And only resigning in January...

irishdude11 · 10-10-2011 12:13AM

Spin it all you want CDfm, he said he wasnt active or involved with FF since 2009, he blatently lied.

raymon · 10-10-2011 01:26AM

What do Fianna Fail, call lying these days ?????

Back in Brian Lenihan sr's day it was called mature recollection.

I'm sure the Gallagher crew will have some similar term

CDfm · 10-10-2011 01:26AM

irishdude11 wrote: »

Spin it all you want CDfm, he said he wasnt active or involved with FF since 2009, he blatently lied.

I am not spinning it,to read some posters he ran the country and FF. .

raymon · 10-10-2011 01:29AM

CDfm wrote: »

I am not spinning it,to read some posters he ran the country and FF. .

Which poster said that ?? I don't remember that one.
Are you making things up ??

MadsL · 10-10-2011 01:34AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOAsJtq8a0o

Bannasidhe · 10-10-2011 01:37AM

So what do people make of Gallagher's appointment to the board of FAS in 2010?

The Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Ms. Mary Coughlan, T.D., today (Thursday, 21 January 2010) announced that she has signed the Commencement Order bringing into force the Labour Services (Amendment) Act 2009 and has appointed a new board to FÁS, the State’s Employment and Training Agency:

Mr. Seán Gallagher
Managing Director, Smarthomes Limited;
Board Member, InterTradeIreland

http://www.djei.ie/press/2010/20100121.htm

It appears more and more to me that while Gallagher 'left' FF in 2009 - he did not distance himself in any meaningful way. Launching campaigns, canvassing for FF candidates, accepting FF appointments to Quangos...

To re-employ CDfm's Leaving a football team metaphor - he may not have paid his dues - but he was still wearing the scarf and cheering them on from the sidelines....

Bannasidhe · 10-10-2011 01:48AM

MadsL wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOAsJtq8a0o

These are very very funny - the Mickey D one nearly cost me a laptop following a coffee down the nose snort.

expectationlost · 10-10-2011 07:03AM

CDfm wrote: »

A possible explanation is that he was hired to do so.

http://www.carolandassociates.com/radio_tv.htm

what a crock imagine paying somebody who's was just on the national executive to speech at a campaign launch, your not helping here with these suggestions.

laucnhes are supposed fundraising opportunities not paying money out.

if he was hired a speaker will he him launch campaign for other political party candidates, and even if he did it wouldn't mean the same as launching for the party you been involved in for 30years.

i have it 5/6 ff campaigns he helped since 2009

CDfm · 10-10-2011 08:02AM

expectationlost wrote: »

what a crock imagine paying somebody who's was just on the national executive to speech at a campaign launch, your not helping here with these suggestions.

if he was hired a speaker will he him launch campaign for other political party candidates, and even if he did it wouldn't mean the same as launching for the party you been involved in for 30years.

i have it 5/6 ff campaigns he helped since 2009

I do not know the answer but I imagine his involvement was "celebrity" related.

I have never watched Dragons Den and didn't give him a thought as a candidate before this thread as I did not know who he was.

Hasn't George Hook with his Labour Party affiliations done FG gigs.

laucnhes are supposed fundraising opportunities not paying money out.

I think election funding is now from the exchequer.

Zubeneschamali · 10-10-2011 09:00AM

Next question for Gallagher: when did you last pay membership dues to Fianna Fail? Feel free to check your bank records, I'm sure you paid by direct debit or cheque, right?

Or are you going to go the full Bertie and claim you used to pay in cash at the races?

The resignation letter upthread says Gallagher was a constituency representative on the Ard Comhairle in January. I'd bet real money that he is still a paid-up member of the party.

raymon · 10-10-2011 09:12AM

CDfm wrote: »

I do not know the answer but I imagine his involvement was "celebrity" related.

I have never watched Dragons Den and didn't give him a thought as a candidate before this thread as I did not know who he was.

Hasn't George Hook with his Labour Party affiliations done FG gigs.

I think election funding is now from the exchequer.

Why are you trying to justify his lies by imagining far fetched hypothetical scenarios

jonniebgood1 · 10-10-2011 09:54AM

raymon wrote: »

Why are you trying to justify his lies by imagining far fetched hypothetical scenarios

You still say lies as if it is definitive rather than your opinion. You should deal with the points raised as opposed to calling them far fetched. Furthermore you should lay your cards on the table here, who is your candidate?

Zubeneschamali · 10-10-2011 10:04AM

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

You still say lies as if it is definitive rather than your opinion.

Upthread is a letter from Gallagher which says he was a constituency representative for Louth on the Fianna Fáil ard-comhairle in January 2011. His campaign are aware of the letter, and have agreed that Gallagher wrote it.

So this statement by Gallagher is a lie:

I left any involvement in Fianna Fáil in terms of being a member of the party or being active back in 2009.

That is not an opinion, it's a fact.

jonniebgood1 · 10-10-2011 10:20AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Upthread is a letter from Gallagher which says he was a constituency representative for Louth on the Fianna Fáil ard-comhairle in January 2011. His campaign are aware of the letter, and have agreed that Gallagher wrote it.

So this statement by Gallagher is a lie:

I left any involvement in Fianna Fáil in terms of being a member of the party or being active back in 2009.

That is not an opinion, it's a fact.

You are incorrect.
It is semantics over the word 'active'.
On one side is the opinion that attending the campaign launch of friends of his is being 'active'.
On the other side 'active' is taking an active role in the executive (his former role) and trying to effect national policy.
Thus it is clearly not definitive. You clearly are fixed on the first side which is fair but to try and ignore the other viewpoint is unfair on SG.

raymon · 10-10-2011 10:27AM

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

You still say lies as if it is definitive rather than your opinion. You should deal with the points raised as opposed to calling them far fetched. Furthermore you should lay your cards on the table here, who is your candidate?

Yes complete and utter lies, totally untrustworthy. If you disagree please put forward a compelling argument

So .....

I never vote for liars or ex IRA people. That's Gallagher the liar and Martin (p o Neil) Mcguinness out.

I am no fan of FG and Gay Mitchell has no real campaign so that rules him out.

None of the independents are worth voting for

So by process of elimination I may have to vote Michael D

I was hoping to have a good independent to vote for bit that hasnt happened.

jonniebgood1 · 10-10-2011 10:35AM

raymon wrote: »

Yes complete and utter lies, totally untrustworthy. If you disagree please put forward a compelling argument

So .....

I never vote for liars or ex IRA people. That's Gallagher the liar and Martin (p o Neil) Mcguinness out.

I am no fan of FG and Gay Mitchell has no real campaign so that rules him out.

None of the independents are worth voting for

So by process of elimination I may have to vote Michael D

I was hoping to have a good independent to vote for bit that hasnt happened.

We have the same conclusion out of the candidates then at this stage but I am not conviced against Gallagher as of yet. I have given both sides of the semantic argument over the supposed 'lie'. You need to consider both sides, IMO it is not as clear as you propose. I think I will need to wait on more grilling of SG before I decide on him, which will follow now due to his success in the opinion polls.

CDfm · 10-10-2011 10:42AM

raymon wrote: »

Why are you trying to justify his lies by imagining far fetched hypothetical scenarios

For the same reason jonnie is, I want to tease out the facts as opposed to your opinion and make an informed decision on the candidates.

I never vote for liars or ex IRA people. That's Gallagher the liar and Martin (p o Neil) Mcguinness out.

I am no fan of FG and Gay Mitchell has no real campaign so that rules him out.

None of the independents are worth voting for [/QUOTE]

Not policies ?

So by process of elimination I may have to vote Michael D

And to think I had you down as a Mary Davis supporter.

Zubeneschamali · 10-10-2011 10:43AM

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

You are incorrect.
It is semantics over the word 'active'.

I left any involvement in Fianna Fáil in terms of being a member of the party

That is a clear statement that Gallagher has not been a member since 2009.

In fact, he was on the Ard Comhairle in January 2011. He lied.

Liam Byrne · 10-10-2011 11:07AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I left any involvement in Fianna Fáil in terms of being a member of the party

That is a clear statement that Gallagher has not been a member since 2009.

In fact, he was on the Ard Comhairle in January 2011. He lied.

Actually, when you factor in typical FF double-speak, it's not that clear.

The words are unnecessarily long-winded to avoid actually saying that he left FF.

So to a normal person they might seem to mean that, but to an FFer the get-out clause is included.

It's still lies and deception in my book, though. Lies are the "intent to deceive".

CDfm · 10-10-2011 11:12AM

raymon wrote: »

Jonniebgood are you really a moderator,I find this hard to believe from the quality of your posts

Thats a bit nasty.

Jonnie and I often post with opposing views and the quality of the sources as opposed to opinions need to be taken into account.

I think jonnie was within his rights for questioning you on your sources and if you had been clearer on them (the sources) it would not have lead posters like me to suspect you had an agenda or bias.

swampgas · 10-10-2011 12:23PM

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

You did link to that but it is then an argument about interpreting what his actions since 2009 are and whether he was active or not, etc. I dont really wish to go into arguing over different interpretations as that would just go on and on.

Sounds a bit like Bill Clinton's "I did not have sex with that woman" to me.

The interpretation that most people would make of him "no longer being active" in FF is that he was not involved in FF related activities, and this has been shown to be clearly not the case.

Is Sean Gallagher telling lies

Comments