Forum on Europe to be scrapped

[TommyO'Brien]

She makes a good point here. The "observer pillar" (or whatever it's called) was basically a means for every nutcase, psycopath and beardy weirdo to arrive in and be given the very same platform of elected political representatives, to make wild and conspiratorial claims about Europe.

These psycopaths included Edward Horgan, and in more recent times, the likes of Libertas

The likes of Libertas, who threw a wobbly when not included as it had been set up before Libertas was created, demanded membership, got it and then couldn't be arsed turning up.

Methinks they were afraid of having their cloud cuckoo claims about Europe exposed by people there who knew what they were talking about on Europe.

Like the farce of Ganley pulling out of addressing the forum when he would be faced with Peter Sutherland, on the basis that Ganley would be sharing the platform with Mary Lou. Apparently he didn't want to be seen dead with her. Ironic that, as he then turned up on Q&A doing exactly that, with they representing the No side in a debate.

Ganley's hyprocrisy knows no bounds and the forum proved that. On the rare occasions where anyone from Libertas bothered to turn up, their arguments were exposed for the shams they are. Maybe that was why they chickened out of showing their faces.

[toxic avenger]

The likes of Libertas, who threw a wobbly when not included as it had been set up before Libertas was created, demanded membership, got it and then couldn't be arsed turning up.

Methinks they were afraid of having their cloud cuckoo claims about Europe exposed by people there who knew what they were talking about on Europe.

Like the farce of Ganley pulling out of addressing the forum when he would be faced with Peter Sutherland, on the basis that Ganley would be sharing the platform with Mary Lou. Apparently he didn't want to be seen dead with her. Ironic that, as he then turned up on Q&A doing exactly that, with they representing the No side in a debate.

Ganley's hyprocrisy knows no bounds and the forum proved that. On the rare occasions where anyone from Libertas bothered to turn up, their arguments were exposed for the shams they are. Maybe that was why they chickened out of showing their faces.

Why did you promise never to post here again, saying the site had gone to hell, yet here you are? At least make an effort to read like someone different, like stop using this as a punctuation mark....

[Trampas]

On the rare occasions where anyone from Libertas bothered to turn up, their arguments were exposed for the shams they are.

But lots of people didn't bother to turn up. No shortage of empty chairs there. And of course the blondie wan from Fine Gael (I've forgotten her name) turning up late and disturbing people in getting to her seat. As I said a useless talking shop (even blondie agrees) presided over by a self-satisfied chairman on auto-pilot.

[Christine Murray]

The Irish Times - Polls

[Lefournier]

Jamie Smyth devotes his Brussels diary to this today. Headed: "Risky ploy ahead of our biggest foreign policy decision in years"

Risky ploy ahead of our biggest foreign policy decision in years - The Irish Times - Tue, Apr 21, 2009

[TommyO'Brien]

But lots of people didn't bother to turn up. No shortage of empty chairs there. And of course the blondie wan from Fine Gael (I've forgotten her name) turning up late and disturbing people in getting to her seat. As I said a useless talking shop (even blondie agrees) presided over by a self-satisfied chairman on auto-pilot.

Actually you are incorrect.

Fine Gael and Labour usually had a full compliment there. Sinn Féin usually did also, as did IBEC, ICTU, the IFA, the Protestant churches, and various other groups who applied for membership.

Libertas were by far the worst attenders, by a mile, and that was after throwing a wobbly to demand membership. It was part of the arrogant rudeness of Libertas that when invited to address the meeting they left the organisers in the dark as to whether they could even be arsed turning up. They didn't have the decency and politeness to at least let the secretarial staff organising the meeting know that that the person meant to be addressing the meeting (Ganley) wouldn't show up. Other groups who wanted to apply for membership couldn't as all available space was taken. So groups wanting to take part, both yes and no, ended up in frustration in the audience, sitting behind an empty group of seats that Libertas insisted be reserved for them but then wouldn't take. If they didn't want to take part, fine - they could have quit and let someone else who wanted to have to take part be given participation rights. But true to form, as they have done elsewhere, they weren't interested in subjecting their claims to scrutiny. They would only turn up to stage a PR stunt if some foreign leader was attending. It was cynical and dishonest, something all too typical of Libertas.

And people wonder why people like I hold them in such contempt. In that as in everything else they were neither honourable nor honest. (A classic example was where all through the referendum they quoted a quote from Commissioner Wallstrom to the forum as a statement of her opinion. I was in the audience that day and know that they were deliberately misquoting her. What she actually said started off with "of course critics of the treaty claim . . ." So the quote of her opinion, paraded out by Libertas (actually, given their behaviour, Liebertas is more accurate) was not her opinion at all, but her paraphrasing of what the No side would claim. And Libertas know that full well. On that occasion they did send a delegation and they know full well that she did not say what they claimed she said as an expression of her opinion, contrary to their dishonest spin.)

One other point: it is worth mentioning that FF were poor attenders themselves, though they would have a couple of members. Pascal Mooney was a regular (and impressive) contributor, as were one or two others. But their delegation had few senior people on it, and often only amounted to two or three people, facing eight or nine people from Fine Gael (including the likes of Alan Dukes, Nora Owen, John Cushanan, etc). TDs of course could not always attend - it would depend on Dáil business. But FG TDs, and Labour TDs were there if at all possible. But FF often had Thomas Byrne as their sole Oireachtas member in attendance. A nice guy, sure, but hardly a big hitter. (Though to be fair, Dick Roche did attend when his timetable allowed, and if missing would be briefed on what happened.) BTW if by the 'blonde wan' you mean Lucinda Creighton, as a TD she would not always be able to attend. It would depend on the Dáil timetable. But she certainly was there a lot.

[Trampas]

Actually you are incorrect.

Fine Gael and Labour usually had a full compliment there. Sinn Féin usually did also, as did IBEC, ICTU, the IFA, the Protestant churches, and various other groups who applied for membership.

Libertas were by far the worst attenders, by a mile, and that was after throwing a wobbly to demand membership. It was part of the arrogant rudeness of Libertas that when invited to address the meeting they left the organisers in the dark as to whether they could even be arsed turning up. They didn't have the decency and politeness to at least let the secretarial staff organising the meeting know that that the person meant to be addressing the meeting (Ganley) wouldn't show up. Other groups who wanted to apply for membership couldn't as all available space was taken. So groups wanting to take part, both yes and no, ended up in frustration in the audience, sitting behind an empty group of seats that Libertas insisted be reserved for them but then wouldn't take. If they didn't want to take part, fine - they could have quit and let someone else who wanted to have to take part be given participation rights. But true to form, as they have done elsewhere, they weren't interested in subjecting their claims to scrutiny. They would only turn up to stage a PR stunt if some foreign leader was attending. It was cynical and dishonest, something all too typical of Libertas.

And people wonder why people like I hold them in such contempt. In that as in everything else they were neither honourable nor honest. (A classic example was where all through the referendum they quoted a quote from Commissioner Wallstrom to the forum as a statement of her opinion. I was in the audience that day and know that they were deliberately misquoting her. What she actually said started off with "of course critics of the treaty claim . . ." So the quote of her opinion, paraded out by Libertas (actually, given their behaviour, Liebertas is more accurate) was not her opinion at all, but her paraphrasing of what the No side would claim. And Libertas know that full well. On that occasion they did send a delegation and they know full well that she did not say what they claimed she said as an expression of her opinion, contrary to their dishonest spin.)

One other point: it is worth mentioning that FF were poor attenders themselves, though they would have a couple of members. Pascal Mooney was a regular (and impressive) contributor, as were one or two others. But their delegation had few senior people on it, and often only amounted to two or three people, facing eight or nine people from Fine Gael (including the likes of Alan Dukes, Nora Owen, John Cushanan, etc). TDs of course could not always attend - it would depend on Dáil business. But FG TDs, and Labour TDs were there if at all possible. But FF often had Thomas Byrne as their sole Oireachtas member in attendance. A nice guy, sure, but hardly a big hitter. (Though to be fair, Dick Roche did attend when his timetable allowed, and if missing would be briefed on what happened.) BTW if by the 'blonde wan' you mean Lucinda Creighton, as a TD she would not always be able to attend. It would depend on the Dáil timetable. But she certainly was there a lot.

Yet again you avail of the opportunity to take a long-winded swipe at Libertas, a grouping that joined the FOE a wet week ago, and incidentally shortly after I decided that the FOE had delighted me long enough. Two lengthy paragraphs out of three would suggest that you are totally obsessed with Libertas.

Surely the more important benchmark in assessing the performance of the FOE would be the level of engagement with the public which was after all its original remit. I can tell you that for many plenary sessions those members of the public were outnumbered by journalists, but I dare say you know that. So much for that “neutral public space…blah blah.” It certainly seemed to me that the FOE had in fact given up on the public and was concentrating on the indoctrination of school-children. It will not be mourned………other than by the Irish Times, and that in itself is instructive.