The REAL reason behind China’s “Zero Covid” policy 22:40 Dec 07 0 comments August Socialist Voice is Out Now! 10:23 Aug 21 0 comments Vol 2 Issue 21 of New LookLeft magazine in shops now! 23:56 May 28 0 comments Media Condemn Presidential Insult but Not Austerity 00:22 Feb 02 0 comments It's a Wonderful Life 12:31 Dec 24 1 comments more >>Blog Feeds
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Alternative Copy of thesaker.is site is available Thu May 25, 2023 14:38 | Ice-Saker-V6bKu3nz
The Saker blog is now frozen Tue Feb 28, 2023 23:55 | The Saker
What do you make of the Russia and China Partnership? Tue Feb 28, 2023 16:26 | The Saker
Moveable Feast Cafe 2023/02/27 ? Open Thread Mon Feb 27, 2023 19:00 | cafe-uploader
The stage is set for Hybrid World War III Mon Feb 27, 2023 15:50 | The Saker
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail supporter? Anthony Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony Waiting for SIPO Anthony
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland
Lockdown Skeptics
Experts Slam the World Health Organisation?s Advice to Set Central Heating at a Chilly 18°C Tue Nov 12, 2024 20:08 | Will Jones
Labour Should ?Do to Farmers What Thatcher Did to Miners?, Tony Blair Aide Says Tue Nov 12, 2024 17:30 | Will Jones
Justin Welby Resigns as Archbishop of Canterbury Tue Nov 12, 2024 15:22 | Will Jones
President Trump: The Final Nail in the Coffin of the Global Environmental Agenda? Tue Nov 12, 2024 13:00 | Tilak Doshi
Why Assisted Dying Would Be a Disaster for Britain Tue Nov 12, 2024 11:15 | Dr Elizabeth Evans |
Bertiegate - the Problem is the Media!
national |
arts and media |
press release
Wednesday May 09, 2007 15:48 by Irish Political Review Group - Irish Political Review Group
As an exercise in representative government the current General Election campaign is a shambles. Instead of a debate about the future direction of government we have the second round of a controversy that should never have had a first round. If Taoiseach Bertie Ahern had any questions to answer about his personal financial arrangements fifteen years ago, the place for him to do so was and is before the Mahon Tribunal. Instead we have a distracting witchhunt against a politician with a long, well regarded record of service to the state. Led by the Irish Times, the print and broadcast media have usurped the constitutional role of the Opposition in this controversy. This subversion of democracy has met with no protest from Fine Gael and Labour. Having little by way of an alternative political programme they have been content to trail sheepishly behind the media’s coattails. Democracy received a further blow when the Supreme Court recently ruled that the Sunday Business Post should be allowed to publish stories based on documents stolen from the Mahon Tribunal. In other words the Supreme Court has ruled that the media may break the law with impunity.
by Frank Zappa Fri Jun 29, 2007 17:37
"In conclusion, the IPR Group is putting forward a different analysis on Bertiegate than is to be found elsewhere. The debate would go better if the focus was on the topic and not on the origins and history of the IPR group. The choice in this controversy is between government by politics as represented by Fianna Fail and government by media as represented by the Irish Times. We support the primacy of politics".
by Frank Zappa Fri Jun 29, 2007 17:32
I know this is a thread about Bertie's persecution by the the IT, but can John or Jack give us some information
by yello Fri Jun 29, 2007 16:40
Poor Alvey! Poor Clifford! Poor John! People dare to criticise them, with detailed quotations from both their past and present hate-sheets!
by John Martin - Irish Politcal Review Fri Jun 29, 2007 08:07
Poor “Yello”! Poor “Spocks Ears”! Poor “Cats outta-de-bag”! They have to hide behind anonymity because the big bad B&ICO will get them. Maybe it will burn down their universities as well, despite those universities being warned in advance by “Cats outta-de-bag”.
by yello Thu Jun 28, 2007 23:32
If you can bear his smugness, here's a link to John Lloyd discussing his time in B&ICO:
by yello Thu Jun 28, 2007 23:08
The accusations against the Irish Political review group are:
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Thu Jun 28, 2007 19:31
I thought Dave Alvey’s comments quoting Brendan Clifford were fair enough. In this thread there have been some quite infantile comments re: the latter. (Mansergh stole his girlfriend etc. etc). And all have them been from anonymous sources.
by ribbid Thu Jun 28, 2007 19:03
30 years ago toilet walls especially those in England were scrawled with a very different kind of graffitti.
by yello Thu Jun 28, 2007 18:37
So you and your buddies can dish out criticism by the bucketload (in magazines,books and websites)
by An Observer Thu Jun 28, 2007 15:45
Let's see-the anonymous blogger found a pamphlet written by Brendan Clifford in which he sneers at Douglas Gageby for his nationalist sympathies, attacks Seamus Heaney in sectarian terms,blames Northern Catholics for their own plight, and denounces Michael Longeley
by Miriam Cotton Thu Jun 28, 2007 13:15
That is just dismal. But it does explain one thing. I'd wondered what the reason was for the IPR's singular inability to recognise some very simple points made in the course of the discussion on this thread. It turns out to be arrogance - fatal to all efforts at intellectual exchange as is clear from the IPR's almost psychotic adherence to it's nutty thesis about Bertie Ahern's backhanders. We should have spotted it earlier.
by David Alvey - Irish Political Review Group Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:06
Everything that needs to be said about the quality of criticism being levelled against the Irish Political Review (IPR) in this thread is said by Brendan Clifford in the latest (July) edition of the IPR (available in Books Upstairs in Dublin) in an article entitled ‘Ersatz Intelligentsia’. Responding to a list of points made in this thread he writes:
by Cat's-Outta-Debag Wed Jun 27, 2007 22:52
"The Chief Executive, Major Thomas McDowell, was unhappy with the editorial line being pushed by his editor Douglas Gageby."
by Not Sure Mon Jun 18, 2007 12:15
John's arguments are interesting, but given the aggressive attacks on the the Mahon tribunal by the Phoenix (you know, the unfunny magazine that never criticises Sinn Fein), the Sunday Independent and the Village, I think the IT's position is a minority one.
by John Martin - Irish Poltical Review Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:44
One of the few admissions of media bias from within the media came from Chekhov Feeney in the Village 14/6/07. Here is what he says:
by SBP Reader Thu Jun 07, 2007 11:09
Bizarre stuff, all this history, in a thread about the corrupt activities of members of the current government.
by Great Cthulhu Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:52
The Wikipedia entry on B&ICO states: "Their actions at that time (E.g.1969-1994) still cause some bitterness".
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:25
I am bemused at some of the criticism of the IPR. The anti-Polish accusation is bizarre given that it has carried a number of articles giving credit to the Polish resistance in deciphering Nazi codes during the Second World War. It has also published a sympathetic pamphlet on Joseph Pilsudski and his profound influence on James Connolly.
by Jack Lane Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:22
Sean Horgan’s curiosity is understandable but I don’t think he will faind any biogrpahy or profile of the Major. He won’t find any feature in the Irish Times or any other paper though we are told what underwear is worn by many lesser mortals. And the Major is alive and well so it should be quite possible for one of our investigateive journalsist to interview him – at the very least. Sean will have to read back issues of the IPR for most of the information available. He was a Major in the Britsh Army and in M15 and was a member of the Whitehall Department that dealt with Court Martials. But the important thing about him is that he became the leading force in the Irish Times. When the IrIsh body politc went into crisis in 1969 he went to the head of his body politic for help and advice and assured them that his paper would do what it was told by them. The paper had always done this faithfully for about 100 years previously but it had gotten into the head of people like Douglas Gageby that it should join the Irish body politic. The Major was having none of that nonsense. Taking the niggers seriously! Hence the significance of the ‘white nigger’ letter. McDowell won the conflict with Gageby and this was confirmed by the current editor when she ran to the defence of McDowell and not her fellow editor when the story broke.
by yello Fri Jun 01, 2007 22:40
How exactly is the Irish Times "re-anglicising" us? I don't understand how criticism of Fianna Fail is laying us open to
by Spock's Ears Fri Jun 01, 2007 22:22
By the way, did Mansergh steal Clifford's girlfriend or something? I can't see any other reason for the IPR's antipathy.
by spock's ears Fri Jun 01, 2007 22:19
Okay,perhaps I was being a little aggressive. Maybe I will write to the IPR concerning some of the issues I have raised about Clifford.
by Eamonn de Paor Fri Jun 01, 2007 21:19
Would these Hiberno fascists be the the people who voted in the Evil Ones, such as the unrepentant, unchastised Bertie? Not including me, I hasten to add; even though I was not fully aware of this crime before I stumbled into this website. But isn't it worrying that one might inadvertently fall into mortal sin and offend against the new I.T.-approved thought-police. In the bad old days before 1989 (let us never speak of them again!) mortal sin required Full Knowledge, as well as Grievous Matter and Full Consent of the Will. Maybe we were too quick in getting rid of the old parish priests, compared with the new lot. Anyway, it's too late for me to turn back now, I burned my bridges there over 40 years ago.
by SBP Reader Fri Jun 01, 2007 19:46
It is unfair to dismiss the nationalism of Hibernofascists as dheasca gealtachta, as they are representative of an international breed insecure in their own identity (be it political or sexual - as in the disturbing interest in labelling homosexuality and paedophilia above). They reject allies in their own prosperity and progress in favour of ideological alliances with their own worst enemies. They see another person's colour before anything else.
by SEAN HORGAN Fri Jun 01, 2007 19:15
Is there a biography of this guy? He seems to have been one of the most important people in Irish society in the past 40 years but I have never read anything about him until this debate.
by Jack Lane Fri Jun 01, 2007 18:52
Can I suggest to 'Spock ears' et al who disagree - to put it mildly - with articles in the IPR that they write to the magazine itself and refute the arguments made in the magazine. The IPR is accused of many things but not with suppressing letters and debate. I think that would be more productive than venting their spleen and creating shoals of red herrings in debates such as this about the Irish Times and what makes it tick. How about it?
by Eamonn de Paor Fri Jun 01, 2007 18:24
And, of course, I condemn - nay, denounce! - the evil Grand Master Brendan von Clifford in whatever guise he may assume!
by Spock's Ears Fri Jun 01, 2007 16:41
You respect the decision of an electorate who weren't allowed to find out the truth about Bertie because he called the election before the Tribunals could dig up any dirt on him.Is that the act of an innocent man?
by Eamonn de Paor Fri Jun 01, 2007 16:08
P.S.
by Eamonn de Paor Fri Jun 01, 2007 15:52
But I thought the ultimate judges of all politicians gave their verdict on FF just over a week ago. What a shame we are stuck with this everso inconvenient system of democracy. Or maybe the nation still needs to be transformed until it starts to think in the manner expected of it and finally delivers the correct verdict? Perhaps the I.T. is right after all?
by Proddy Gayboy Fri Jun 01, 2007 15:40
"the nation the IPR wanted to place us under the control of" would actually be Tir Gealtachta and existed only in the imaginations of a few self-elected men (sic), even after independence.
by yello Fri Jun 01, 2007 14:30
A journalist from IPR started this whole tread, Eamonn!
by Eamonn de Paor Fri Jun 01, 2007 13:35
My work takes me frequently to Poland where I have many close friends. I am aware that many Poles are embarrassed at their country's inter-war treatment of Ukrainians in the territory they captured after World War 1, and at their involvement in the share-out of other parts of Eastern European non-Polish territory with Hitler, as sanctioned by Britain before the great rupture of 1939.
by Spock's ears Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:03
Eamonn,I take it then you have no problem with the opinions expressed by Clifford. Otherwise you would not dodge the issue by whinging about how anyone who opposes the "I.T. project is practically a paedophile".
by Eamonn de Paor Fri Jun 01, 2007 09:47
Wow! Anyone who opposes the I.T. project is practically a paedophile! Somebody is very upset. I wonder who?
by yello Fri Jun 01, 2007 00:03
Professor Noam Chomsky:
by spock's ears Thu May 31, 2007 23:43
Eamonn, you haven't said anything about Mr. Clifford's disgusting contempt for the Polish and Norwegian victims of Totalitarianism.
by SBP Reader Thu May 31, 2007 22:54
John Martin: "I accept that Ahern received gift/loans of tens of thousands of euros. There was nothing illegal in what Ahern did"
by Eamonn de Paor Thu May 31, 2007 22:36
Re the above contribution:
by spock's ears Thu May 31, 2007 20:06
Here’s excerpts from another sickening article by Brendan Clifford, in which his hatred of Britain and Poland warps his understanding of history. In bashing Cathal O’Shannon’s programmes on Irish Nazis (which I haven’t seen), he expresses gloating admiration for aspects of both Hitlerism and Stalinism.
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Thu May 31, 2007 19:08
For people who are by no means sympathetic to The Irish Times there is a remarkable amount of defensiveness when it is attacked. I have attempted to raise some issues about the Irish Times, which along with other media outlets, has been attacking Ahern. In most, but not all cases, the response has been an attack on the Irish Political Review. BJ under the heading “Tell the Truth” seems to think I am trying to tell lies although he doesn’t say what lies I have told. Chekov thinks the IPRG is “bonkers”.
by SBP Reader Thu May 31, 2007 16:48
1939 and all that is fascinating. Meanwhile, back in the real world, a tribunal discusses whether the elected head of government received 80,000 or perhaps 167,000 or perhaps some other sum entirely, and whether the sums were diverted party donations, planning bribes, as-yet-untaxed gifts or as-yet-unpaid loans. One day we might discuss his daughter's one million for a book deal with publishers (Murdoch's empire) who were angling for a (successful) takeover of the Irish broadcasting monopoly, or how the same media outfit gave him publicity digouts before and after the election. Just how much is the Ahern brand worth now? 10/10 for consistent sidelining.
by wageslave Thu May 31, 2007 16:00
And while talking about the polish getting a raw deal in WWII, let us not forget the polish intelligence and their huge (but often conveniently forgotten) contribution to cracking the enigma code, which some say led to victory in WWII
by pat c Thu May 31, 2007 15:30
"So Clifford is sneering at the poor Poles who died bravely to save their city from the Third Reich, who were "treated accordingly", i.e. slaughtered."
by Chekov Thu May 31, 2007 15:00
It's worth pointing out that any Indymedia regulars will have been aware for a long time of the "white nigger" letter and the shenanigans involving the Irish Times and Major McDowell. We ran it as a feature back in 2004: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/64231
by Miriam Cotton Thu May 31, 2007 14:36
Eamonn - your excitable post has brought us all the way to...1939?
by Eamonn de Paor Thu May 31, 2007 13:51
Yes. I too would like to see this article. If only to see whether it offers some counter to the present-day Churchills who evoke knee-jerk militarism by playing the Nazi-Hitler card whenever they want to attack, invade and occupy a country, grab some oilfields, destroy a state which does not kow-tow to them, and kill thousands while they are at it. And to the hordes of Boys Own Bigglesworths who are eager to parrot the propaganda. The Irish, having been taken in by this kind of propaganda (“Poor Little Poland – sorry, Belgium”) in 1914-18, have practically forgotten the price we paid. So the Churchills and Bigglesworths reckon we are ready to be suckered yet again. We are expected by the likes of Cathal O’Shannon (veteran of Burma (!!!), the Burma which was occupied by Imperial Britain in 1886 in order to grow opium for the Chinese market which the British had fought two wars for, the Burma where O’Shannon went with the British Army to fight the Burmese freedom fighters under Aung San (father of Aung Suu Kyi) who they later bumped off even though he had by then made terms with the western imperial side), we are expected to have guilty consciences because a handful of raggle-taggle flotsam and jetsam of the defeated Nazi regime washed up on Ireland’s shores. To soften us up for present-day imperial militarism we are supposed to shut our eyes to the post 1945 relationships that the western imperial powers made with the German Nazi system, after they had got rid of the most embarrassing of them in the Nuremberg comedy.This was the German system which Britain had sponsored until early 1939, when it turned against it for imperial reasons – sacrificing the unfortunate Poles into the bargain by offering them a bogus military alliance.
by spock's ears Thu May 31, 2007 11:27
I'm not sure if the article is online anywhere-I have a photocopy.However the article also includes
by pat c Thu May 31, 2007 10:47
I haven't read the article you speak of of but I could understand someone calling the Nuremburg Trials a travesty of justice. The British had committed War Crimes in their Terror Bombing of German Cities. The British had also slaughtered tens of millions as they ravaged colonies all over the World as had the French. The USSR under Stalin had also the blood of millions of innocents on its hands. The US was had intervened in many Latin American States resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. Over 1 million people died in the US suppression of the resistance in the Phillipines.
by Spock's ears Thu May 31, 2007 10:36
Every time someone raises questions about the IRP's motives, they simply repeat the story about the letter to avoid dealing with the fact they want any questions about possible FF corruption censored.
by bj Thu May 31, 2007 00:11
When Raphael Burke was outed we heard the same claims made -
by Jack Lane - Aubane Historical Society Wed May 30, 2007 22:58
John Martin has done us all a great service (above) in providing a glimpse of how the Irish Times operates. Readers may be interested in the following correspondence I had with Madam on 'the white nigger letter' which shows how concerned the Irish Times is with putting the record straight when itself is the subject that needs recording.
by bj Wed May 30, 2007 14:04
"The Irish Times has now the prerogative of the harlot throughout history: power without responsibility."
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Wed May 30, 2007 11:33
I’m glad you seem to accept the significance of the “white nigger” letter, which goes beyond a racist view of Irish people, but indicates that the most powerful person in the Irish Times in the last forty years wished to place the newspaper under the guidance of the British State. I don’t know how some posters can consider this just a “private” letter. It is a document indicating that he approached representatives of the British State and those representatives (the British Ambassador and functionaries of the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office) wished to assure Downing Street that they would “exploit this opportunity”.
by Eamonn de Paor Wed May 30, 2007 11:10
What a display of Free State smugness!
by Zen-Tao Wed May 30, 2007 00:21
John,this is what the IPR's editor David Alvey said about Bowen..." Given that she spied for a foreign power against this state, why should she be claimed as an Irish writer? Her novels were a contribution to English literature. That she is still defended by various influential Irish academics, including Dr Mansergh*, testifies to a collapse of faith in the national tradition on the part of what might be called the Irish intelligentsia. " Unpublished letter Apr. 13, 2004.
by great cthulhu Tue May 29, 2007 19:32
What! Granny's favourite magazine praised the white-hooded thugs!
by yello Tue May 29, 2007 19:01
John said nothing about the Peter Hain comment, or the conspiracy theories about Omagh, or the article by Brendan Clifford that said the Nuremburg trials were a "travesty"(Is Clifford seriously saying all the accused Nazis should have been acquitted?).
by Watcher Tue May 29, 2007 13:16
What's wrong with calling Bertie what he is; A bought and paid for liar.
by SBP Reader Tue May 29, 2007 12:53
It is nice to see that the Irish Times reads this column. Patsy McGarry seems a little touchy about criticism of his employer and colleagues in a rather egoistic piece today "For penance, say 78 Fianna Fáils and two PDs - Following the general election campaign, a penitent journalist goes to confession." In this attempt at satire he writes "Fianna Fail bring out the worst in me at election time ... like trying to dig up dirt on Bertie ... I wrote rash judgement, calumny and detraction".
by bj Tue May 29, 2007 11:44
One of the problems with the media and the political parties in general is that they overrate the
by Miriam Tue May 29, 2007 11:21
John
by Marlboro Man Tue May 29, 2007 09:48
"I take it that your own juxtaposition of "homosexual .... paedophile" is an accurate representation of this virtually unread publication, that is in any case completely inconsequential to any discussion of portraying Bertie in the media."
by Proddy Gayboy Tue May 29, 2007 09:19
Yes, John Martin, you are absolutely correct to complain that anyone would "misrepresent a small circulation magazine such as the Irish Political Review". Although your fixation with a sentence in a letter from the mists of the last century is not enlightening the debate.
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Tue May 29, 2007 08:45
"I don’t want to go off the point, but…"
by Zen-Tao Mon May 28, 2007 19:56
I don't want this to go off the point, but I must ask this:
by Stuart Mon May 28, 2007 11:40
John Martin "Can I suggest that the thesis of the Irish Political Review has been proved correct?"
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Mon May 28, 2007 11:07 Can I suggest that the thesis of the Irish Political Review has been proved correct? Can I also suggest that my posting of last Tuesday stands up quite well in terms of the outcome of the election? 1969 British Ambassador letter 0.12 Mb
by billy idle Sun May 27, 2007 19:59
My theory on this is that independent newspapers were smart enough to see how stories about Berties dodgy personal finances last october actually increased FF's popularity. This time it had the added benefit of distracting the electorate from the real failures of this government in the areas of health,education,environment and transport etc.
by Dagon Sun May 27, 2007 19:38
Dunno. The Indo ran a lot of anti FF stories even in the vlast week of the election campaign. Even in the Sindo there are real journalists like Gene Kerrigan, John Drennan and Alann Ruddock.
by billy idle Sun May 27, 2007 19:32
I think you'll find alot more West Brits and other nasties at the offices of Sir O'Reilly's rag-sheets. No wonder mad hatter harris and mental Myers are so at home their,
by Great Cthulhu Sun May 27, 2007 17:24
....My earlier guess was proved wrong. He won a majority after all, in spite of those nasty
by SBP Reader Tue May 22, 2007 22:58
It didn't occur to me until you posted, but Paddy Power was very accurate on the Eurovision and on previous elections - certainly far more accurate than polls, adjusted or raw. They have some lovely tables on every question I can think of, including Bertie to win, McDowell for demotion and FF/Lab for government.
by Odds 50/1 Tue May 22, 2007 20:45
Our cyndicate has put 100 @ 50/1 Ahern. pd 100 @ 55/1 Kenny l/p 100 @ 30/1 Rabbit l/p 100 @ 5/1 Higgins S/P
by Great Cthulhu Tue May 22, 2007 17:35
Bertie must be in big trouble if he has only Harris and the B&ICO/Aubane gang supporting him!!
by John Boy Tue May 22, 2007 15:51
The logic is flawed since there are many people that would like to see the back of FF but see the alternatives as incapable.
by mm Tue May 22, 2007 15:42
Its well known that, after a time, any corporation or company begins to take on
by John Boy Tue May 22, 2007 15:21
There's very little discernible difference between the parties.
by mm Tue May 22, 2007 15:18
If FF resume power we will see the continuation of the move to the right.
by John Boy Tue May 22, 2007 14:34
There's no point in change for change's sake.
by SBP Reader Tue May 22, 2007 12:59
For sure the BIFFO will be taoiseach if FF are elected - Bertie is headed the way of Judge Naughty O'Buachalla and others who resign rather than answer the simplest of questions. I am sure the IT know with precision the nature of Bertie's offences and whether they are or are not criminal, but they are seeking control of a compromised leader. They will not get it because the questions still remain and a questionable leader is unsupportable.
by John Boy Tue May 22, 2007 12:43
Whatever your views on who says what, it's blatantly obvious that the only credible conteder to be the next Taoiseach is Biff Cowen.
by spock's ears Tue May 22, 2007 12:22
Eamonn says he doesn't care where the criticisms of the IT are published -I wonder would he say that if, say "Penthouse" published a searing critique of the IT : ).
by yello Tue May 22, 2007 11:17
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Tue May 22, 2007 11:14
The idea that the Irish Times has been objective in its reporting of the General election is, in my view, eccentric. I could give numerous examples of its bias.
by Spock's ears Tue May 22, 2007 10:45
The Irish Times has criticised (rightly) Bertie, but it also gave him a chance to defend himself.
by Eamonn de Paor Tue May 22, 2007 09:52
Curiouser and curiouser!
by spock's ears Mon May 21, 2007 22:57
Last Week the IT published TWO full pages
by SBP Reader Mon May 21, 2007 22:30
"Curious, isn't it, that when a serious criticism surfaces of a very powerful institution, a storm of irrelevances suddenly arises"
by Eamonn de Paor Mon May 21, 2007 22:10
"When the IPR does it, nobody seems to notice."
by spock's ears Mon May 21, 2007 21:29
I agree there are problems with the Irish Times, but I have read the IPR
by SBP Reader Mon May 21, 2007 20:55
"The Irish Times, on the other hand, is far from irrelevant"
by Eamonn de Paor Mon May 21, 2007 20:47
The IPR is a complete irrelevance. I for one never heard of it and neither know nor care who or what it espouses, - left, right or centre. (Frankly, it irritates me that in the course of important discussion in an election campaign, that people should insult the intelligence of the participants and start running after hares.) The Irish Times, on the other hand, is far from irrelevant - it is a major player in Irish affairs; and in view of its conduct, close scrutiny and questioning are warranted. I don't care who asks the questions so long as we get to the bottom of what the I.T. is up to.
by yello Sun May 20, 2007 17:31
I agree with the above poster. The Irish Political Review has published dozens of offensive comments over the years,(loads of them as bad as "white nigger") all far worse than one
by spock's ears Sun May 20, 2007 14:19
Their Haughey-worship isn't the worst thing about the IPR.
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Tue May 15, 2007 09:20
Miriam,
by Miriam Cotton - MediaBite Mon May 14, 2007 20:33 mcotton at mediabite dot org
John
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Mon May 14, 2007 19:53
Miriam,
by SBP Reader Mon May 14, 2007 13:56
"If you tell the truth, it always comes out the same, no matter how you tell it".
by Miriam Cotton Mon May 14, 2007 13:32
John
by jasper Mon May 14, 2007 12:44
The saddest thing about this election is that even if current government was ousted, the scenario would be akin to Animal Farm where the animals looking in at the pigs (Napoleon et al) thought they were seeing humans.
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Mon May 14, 2007 12:43
Miriam,
by SBP Reader Mon May 14, 2007 12:41
I don't think that Vincent Browne's other interests remotely answer the inconsistency between the attack on Bertie in the SBP and at a press conference last week, and the poodling support for him this week http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=VINCE...1.asp - Bertie hasn't remotely provided a sensible response to Browne's questions, at least not any that Browne publishes. And where is the commentary about the sinister influence of CJH's mentor and handler PJ Mara? There is an element of self-promotion that is most blatant in Jody Corcoran's "exclusives", and in general the media are stirring without attempting to resolve the truth or to report the full facts known to them. It is like watching a teenager pick acne spots while Clearasil lies unused in the cupboard.
by Slim Jim Mon May 14, 2007 12:27
Re the BICO, the intellectual forerunners of the Irish Political Review; 'BICO regarded the union as more important than working class union, believed uncritically in the benefits of British rule in Ireland and elsewhere; justified, or denied discrimination against Catholics in Northern Ireland; and called for hard line measures against the IRA but not against Loyalist paramilitaries. Its Orangeism was evident in its retrospective support for Williamite settlement in ireland, which it regarded as unqualifiedly progressive.'
by Miriam Cotton Mon May 14, 2007 12:00
John
by Bored SBP Reader Mon May 14, 2007 11:40
To answer your question with Vincent Browne - well, he's got a magazine to run, and it's in debt. So that explains all the posturing. He's also a man not averse to looking for dig-outs himself (in the purely legal sense, of course).
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Mon May 14, 2007 08:58 Miriam, you seem to suspect the worst of our politicians and even the Irish people, who should "grow up" but The Irish Times is above suspicion. 1969 British Ambassador Letter 0.12 Mb
by Eamonn de Paor Sun May 13, 2007 22:26
If I understand the original IPR posting correctly, it does not seem to propose that the issue is between the media on the one hand and the government on the other hand. Nor that the issue is particularly about whether either one of these two is more or less capitalist or globalist than the other. In fact, many aspects of globalist capitalism have the more or less enthusiastic consent of the majority of Irish people, whether we like it or not. (I don't particularly like it.)
by Seán Ryan Sun May 13, 2007 21:20
Whilst I've consistantly agreed on the point made - that the media do have an agenda to subvert the populace - I still fail to see the point of this article or indeed the follow-up comments of either Eamonn de Paor or John Martin. In fairness if this article were just about saying that the media were corrupt it would have been hidden, as there are literally hundreds of examples of this viewpoint already on this site.
by SBP Reader Sun May 13, 2007 18:04
What is with Vincent Browne? This week he is saying "These foolish things shouldn't scupper Ahern" in the Sunday Business Post, dismissing the cash, digouts and other gifts / loans as just "a few foolish things 13 years ago". Last week (http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2007/05/06/story233...8.asp) he was concerned about "Preposterous tale of Bertie’s home improvements", with questions that Bertie cannot consistently answer.
by poster cost Sun May 13, 2007 16:30
The P.D. Slogan says Don't throw it all away. Can anyone tell us how much is one of those Large posters.I'd be very interested to know.
by Miriam Cotton Sun May 13, 2007 13:12
The current election campagin is a shambles, not because of anything innate in the Irish people or its political class but because of the agenda being pursued by the Irish Times, which has been followed by other media.
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Sun May 13, 2007 09:53
Yes, I agree with Eamonn de Paor. Very well put.
by Eamonn de Paor Sat May 12, 2007 20:38
Response to Sean Ryan from Eamonn de Paor:
by Seán Ryan Sat May 12, 2007 20:34
I have often referred to the Irish Times as a piece of toilet paper. Indeed I have not been kind to it in this thread. If this makes me a pawn of the Times, I have no answer.
by yello Sat May 12, 2007 20:19
Considering Scotland may be about to break away from the UK, it may take more than "denigrating the national revolution" (i.e. disagreeing with the IPR), to return Ireland to Britain!
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Sat May 12, 2007 20:12
Sean, I can’t say if the left is trying to align us with Britain. I don’t know what goes on inside people’s heads. But by its support of the destructive activities of The Irish Times and the Tribunals it is objectively laying the groundwork for such an alignment. (Fortunately it has limited influence).
by John's mother Sat May 12, 2007 19:50
"No, I think Sinn Fein will do better than I predicted some months ago. This is because they've largely abandoned their crazy economic policies, as many posters on Indymedia have pointed out. In the past few weeks they've dumped their plans to increase corporation tax, they've dumped their plans to increase capital gains tax. Virtually every day since the campaign started, Gerry Adams has been on the radio announcing the abandonment of their previous policy of raising this or that tax. I'm probably the only poster on this site who welcomes this. "
by Fred Johnston Sat May 12, 2007 19:15 sylfredcar at iolfree dot ie
The problem is not the media. The problem is when skeletons come popping out of politicians' cupboards. It is important to make it look as if good people are being maligned by a vicious, sensationalist and, best of all, Dublin-based media. There is never any question of morals, ethics, or simply doing the right thing being discussed; no, the bad news mongers caused it all. It's an old ploy, belovéd of political parties desperate for scapegoats and who are aware that a rural-urban divide can be exploited, always.
by Seán Ryan Sat May 12, 2007 18:59
I do not support Noel O Gara and have never met the man.
by Eamonn Sat May 12, 2007 18:53
I think you are the one who is in urgent need of a bowel movement. You would indeed fit into the category of bogus left. What other explanation is there for you supporting Noel O'Gara? Perhaps its his Constitutional Rights you worry about. Poor Mr O'Gara is being cruelly treated by the State. All Landlords should be free to trample on the serfs!
by Seán Ryan Sat May 12, 2007 18:49
Revolution?
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Sat May 12, 2007 18:26
We are getting slightly off the subject and I'm not sure from what perspective Eamonn de Paor is coming from, but I have to agree with his analysis.
by Seán Ryan Sat May 12, 2007 17:59
Allow me to express that I am confused as to what point Eamonn is trying to make in the above comment. He still will not say that he disagrees with the Irish Times viewpoint.
by Eamonn de Paor Sat May 12, 2007 16:37
Sean Ryan says, above:
by John Sat May 12, 2007 15:51
"You have obviously got absolutely no idea how ridiculuous your assertions are."
by R. Isible Sat May 12, 2007 15:15
This is all rather disappointing and trivial. However your claim to have written two statistics textbooks enables me to place you squarely into the category of complete and utter liar. There is no earthly way that anyone with the most trivial introduction to the subject would make the claims you have made. You have obviously got absolutely no idea how ridiculuous your assertions are. It's impossible for me to enlighten you before you've done a couple of months of hard work. Come back when you've done that if you still need help, but I think you'll realise how silly what you've been claiming is before then.
by John Sat May 12, 2007 15:03
Not only have I read numerous statistics textbooks, I've written two, probably before you were born. Perhaps you've read them. Although, if you have, they don't seem to have done you much good. Which of the points I stated in my last post are you in disagreement with? You don't specify. Since you consider yourself an expert on time series, here's another for you to digest: Ireland's infant mortality rate. Before you ask, the figures come from the CSO Vital statistics reports:
by R. Isible Sat May 12, 2007 14:25
I didn't mean to talk above your head. I thought you were being a disingenuous troll and was sincerely unaware that you're completely ignorant of basic statistics. My apologies for wasting your time. I'd suggest that before you attempt to discuss this further that you spend some time reading an introductory textbook paying particular attention to the sections on correlation and time-series. Best of luck.
by John Sat May 12, 2007 10:47
Mr. Ryan,
by John Sat May 12, 2007 10:39
Mr. Isible,
by Seán Ryan Sat May 12, 2007 06:52
I suppose I ought to point out to John and his buddies, that on the above graph, that travelling by bus is by far the safest mode of transport.
by Seán Ryan Sat May 12, 2007 06:13
I wonder why John didn't use a much clearer representation of the statistics for road deaths in Ireland, considering that he misused this particular site earlier with regard to his attempt to suggest that Mr. Ahern has made Ireland a happy place. I got the graph I'm posting from a pdf file at: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/roadsafety_library/care/d...n.pdf
by R. Isible Sat May 12, 2007 04:37
John, by your own data and logic the years 2003 - 2005 are a damning indictment of whatever government was in power then. Similarly if you look at the tiny rise (which is in the nature of a random fluctuation) which I agree occured from 1994-1997 you'll see several rises of comparable or much greater magnitude if you make even the sincerest effort to look at the graph.
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Fri May 11, 2007 22:44
Thanks for your comments. At least you are prepared to engage with the issues raised rather than remain stuck in some left wing sectarian dispute of more than 30 years ago.
by John Fri May 11, 2007 22:16
The figures are simply the numbers of road deaths given in the Garda Siochanna web site divided by the population of Ireland (i.e. R. Ireland). Your graph matches exactly what my figures show. Road deaths ROSE between 1994 and 1997 during the period of the last FG/Lab government. Your graph clearly shows that. They actually rose each year between 1994 and 1997. If you can't see that in your graph, I'll send you a microscope. Road deaths then fell after 1997, which again your graph clearly shows. The only difference between your graph and my figures is that my figures go up to 2006, while your graph stops at 2004. Try and get up to date.
by Pro Dev - Irish Political Review Group Fri May 11, 2007 22:07
There is a recurring theme in this discussion that the IPR group is bizarre and that the development of the group is laughably inconsistent. Actually the IPR is an established publication with a record of coherent political analysis. What some people seem to have difficulty with is that we are prepared to engage in independent thinking.
by Seán Ryan Fri May 11, 2007 21:24
It seems to be an act of blatant hypocrissy to constantly focus on the media and moan about them not focussing on the 'issues.'
by R. Isible Fri May 11, 2007 21:18
As always on Indymedia.ie (or anywhere else for that matter) one of the surest signs of someone trying to mislead or misdirect is when they fail to provide a citation in support of their contentions. Citations are great. They let anyone else go and check whether or not there's: 1) what they'd consider a reputable source; 2) the "facts" have been interpreted correctly; 3) there are other facts which provide a different picture.
by John's mother Fri May 11, 2007 21:03
Lordie me son, you've really exceeded yourself. Ranting about the "anti-national" agenda of Geraldine Kennedy and the IT is enough to place you in the category of prize fruit loops. You've made an eejit of yourself many times before on this site but this really takes the biscuit.
by John Fri May 11, 2007 20:07
Chekov:
by John Fri May 11, 2007 19:55
Is it actually important what the motivation of the Irish Times is? The key point is that they are providing hysterical and biased coverage of this election and indulging in a witchhunt against one particular party. If this was limited to opinion columns in the paper, alongside accurate news columns, it would be tolerable. But, it isn't. Every news story in the paper is being doctored to fit in with their overall viewpoint and any news which doesn't support their view that the country is going to the dogs under the present Government is simply not reported. It could well be because they are anti-national, as the Irish Political Review Group say. Its quite possible that its a mixture of motives on the part of different people in the Irish Times. Some in the Irish Times may have both an anti-national motivation and a socialist motivation, e.g. Fintan O'Toole. Others, eg. Vincent Browne, may have a socialist motivation, without being anti-national. While Geraldine Kennedy, I now realise from reading the posts here, probably has only an anti-national motivation. But, the point is, they all hate Fianna Fail and want to see this Government defeated. Fair enough, all are entitled to their view, which can be expressed in the opinion columns of the paper. But, its an assault on democracy when all the news reporting is as biased and inaccurate as it has been in the Irish Times since the election campaign began. It reminds me of the Sun in the 1992 UK general election. Chekov, if you ever want to be an ace reporter, you should grab a scoop when its handed to you on a plate.
by Eamonn de Paor Fri May 11, 2007 19:09
The earlier Irish leadership was "fundamentally mistaken" (see Chekov above). The current leadership is fundamentally corrupt. If this is true then the Irish people who have generated and authorised such leadership from among their own must itself be fundamentally flawed in accordance with the recent denunciation of us by the Irish Times, and its demand that we must re-brand or re-invent ourselves is well-founded.
by Miriam Cotton Fri May 11, 2007 18:57
It is bizarre. What comes over is an irrational anti-Irish Times agenda on the part of IPR. God knows the IT is far from perfect and deserving of criticism, but reading a pro-British/US agenda into their motives and coverage of 'Bertiegate' is perverse. It really only serves to demonstrate a sort of obsessive chippiness about the paper's historical role in Irish journalism. While there is much justifiable criticism to be made on that account, IPR, because of their determiation to put their dislike of the IT ahead of every other consideration, are anxious to show a causal link between two issues which are quite separate - hence the necessity to re-interpret Fianna Fail's record on corruption. There is a serious loss of perspective apparent in their article. Perhaps the kindest thing we can do is to look away discreetly - and give them time to realise what chumps they have made of themselves.
by chekov Fri May 11, 2007 18:40
"one might think that the news that we're now moving towards the top of the EU league table for life expectancy would merit a mention in the Irish Times. But, alas no. Perhaps Chekov will print it in his Village magazine and have a scoop."
by Serge Fri May 11, 2007 18:28
Its completely bizzare cos the tiny sect ( BICO/IPR/Cliffordistas) making the argument are as bizarre as it gets: unionist-stalinists turned nationalist-social democrats/old labourists. Now there are many exampleson the left of people making spectacular ideological journies but this is one of the freakiest.
by Chekov Fri May 11, 2007 17:39
"If the above exhibition of national self-hatred is anything to go on, then the Irish Times has already won, and we should just apologise to Queen Elizabeth and ask her to overlook the past 90 years of Irish history."
by John Fri May 11, 2007 17:27
To John Martin - Irish Political Review:
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Fri May 11, 2007 16:39
As it happens I left school in the early 1980s as well. And there was a lot of reason to be “bitter and twisted” then: emigration (was it 30,000 a year?) and unemployment close to 20%. I remember the joke at the time was “we should return the country to Britain and apologise to Queen Elizabeth for the way we left it”.
by Miriam Cotton Fri May 11, 2007 16:28
"...but there has never has been the faintest whiff of suspicion in the highly sensitive world of politics that he has acted for particular business interests or whatever.
by P.K Lynch Fri May 11, 2007 13:56
Ray McSharry was an outstanding minister and did an enourmous amount of work for Sligo. I think if you cross the Shannon you'll find your grossly inaccurate opinion of the man very strongly challenged.
by Bitter and Twisted Fri May 11, 2007 13:45
It may be of no consequence to John Martin that a few millionares bankrolled Haughey. It matters deeply to me, a school leaver in the early 1980s who remembers that hypocrite telling us that we were living beyond our means while he bought Charvet shirts. Well my family weren't living beyond our means. I remember 'health cuts hurt the old the sick and the handicapped.' How is it unpatriotic to oppose Haughey, a man who aped the lifestyle of an English squire? He owned an island for christ's sake! This is trying to provide some sort of left wing cover for a crowd of chancers who have bene in the pockets of land re-zoners and property developers since the 1960s. As for 'pro-Dev' I have no problem with Dev, I don't think he was a hypocrite; Haughey, McSharry, Ahern, Lawlor, Burke...bastards, all of them. And we are still paying for it.
by brabazon - none Fri May 11, 2007 05:51 davidpormonde at yahoo dot ie
Bertie has been found out....The media are no longer in fear of the Irish government gestapo, thanks to one courageous journalist who was arrested for daring to follow a story that the minister for injustice tried to quash. The tribunals they set up only mean that none of the shysters can be brought before a real court of law to answer for their crimes......Let's get some hungry politicians from Eastern Europe at a fraction of the price!......Let them live in the Ireland we do. The whiff of third world style corruption has always made this country a joke in the eyes of the world. It's time to make an example of these money grubbing arseholes who think that the laws of the land only apply to people who earn less than seventy grand a year.....NONE of these thieves have the interests of Ireland or her people foremost in their minds....
by Pro Dev - Irish Political Review Group Fri May 11, 2007 00:00
Checkov’s identification of a fundmental flaw in the IPR Group’s press statement is itself fundamentally flawed. He wants the media to follow up aspects of the Taoiseach’s finances that the Mahon Tribunal is prevented from investigating. The point is that the Mahon Tribunal as a judicial body is trying with every means at its disposal to prevent newspapers from publishing stories based on leaked documents from it. Its work is being undermined by these leaks.
by Eamonn de Paor Thu May 10, 2007 22:53
Corruption ... Gombeens ... !!!
by Spinning Quickly Thu May 10, 2007 20:34
"We should defend our tradition of corruption so?"
by Spinning Quickly Thu May 10, 2007 20:18
I honestly don't know why they support the idea that a major newspaper should be connected with a political party - saying that because it's so elsewhere is merely confusing an "is" with an "ought" - it provides no explanation. What is given is an odd notion that a political party would somehow give the newspaper guidance or an overall outlook. This strikes me as at best patronising and worst reduces the paper to a mouthpiece for the party. (I have grave reservations about Geraldine Kennedys' editorial decisions in the Irish Times.)
by John Martin - Irish Political Review Thu May 10, 2007 20:13
I agree that it is not easy to explain why left wingers are urging a vote for Fianna Fail, although there are precedents for communists supporting that party.
by Slim Jim Thu May 10, 2007 17:19
Still no guesses fromm anybody on why former Maoists are now lending intellectual defence to Fianna Fail over corruption. The Irish Political Review has been arguing for a year that Charlie Haughey was hard done by and that it is all an Irish Times plot to take us back into the empire. This from people who practically invented the two-nations theory. Why?
by name Thu May 10, 2007 15:40
I see you got published on the Village site and in the magazine but a commentator is equally confused about. I coulnd;t say it better myself. You regret that "some newspapers, especially the Irish Times, have no association with political parties".
by Gotcha Thu May 10, 2007 15:01
Incredible headline in Sir Tony's Herald today.
by Jerry Cornelius Thu May 10, 2007 14:25
Its a matter of opinion and in my opinion Collins writes an opinion column on Saturdays, the inclusion of gossip supports my opinion that his column is opinion.
by John Thu May 10, 2007 14:17
This is an excerpt from Stephen Collins column last week:
by Chekov Thu May 10, 2007 13:53
"If you're using him as an example of how Geraldine Kennedy is rallying the Irish Times behind the PD election campaign, don't you think that's rather strange behaviour on his part."
by Jerry Cornelius Thu May 10, 2007 13:46
"Stephen Collins doesn't write an opinion column."
by John Thu May 10, 2007 13:37
Stephen Collins doesn't write an opinion column. If his views are as you say, that's probably why he's not allowed to.
by Chekov Thu May 10, 2007 12:24
"The vast majority of columnists in the Irish Times are left-wingers..."
by Miriam Cotton - MediaBite Thu May 10, 2007 11:13 mcotton at mediabite dot org
Sure, the IT allows an appearance of 'balance'.
by John Thu May 10, 2007 10:58
The idea that Geraldine Kennedy and the Irish Times are trying to whip up support for the PDs is absurd. The editor controls who writes in the newspaper. The vast majority of columnists in the Irish Times are left-wingers: Fintan O'Toole, Vincent Browne, Mary Raftery and until recently Maev-Ann Wren (although she seems to have disappeared in this election, hope she's not ill). All these columnists and others spew out venom against the PDs in every column they write. I don't know of any columnist in the Irish Times who supports the PDs. For this election, Fintan O'Toole seems to have been promoted by Geraldine Kennedy to numero uno commentator. He has a column on the election almost every day, including today. His hatred of the PDs is legendary and every column he writes is full of the usual left-wing nonsense. So, if Kennedy is trying to whip up support for the PDs, she has a strange way of going about it. If that's her objective, why promote Fintan O'Toole, an avowed opponent of the PDs and long-time socialist, to such a position of prominence in the paper's election coverage. So what if she supported the PDs 20 years ago? People change their views. Look at Eoghan Harris.
by Miriam Cotton - MediaBite Thu May 10, 2007 10:33 mcotton at mediabite dot org
Where the Irish Times is concerned it's reasonable to speculate that this attack on Ahern is an IBEC/PD backed attempt to unseat him because of attempts to temper their approach to the economy. The PDs and IBEC are on a roll with destroying the concept of the welfare state in Ireland. They are dismantling whatever fragile infrastructure we have as a matter of driven ideology. The more division and inequality they create, the more they feel they have succeeded. This is making them increasingly unpopular as their 2% standing in the polls now indicate - they are in fact electorally insignificant if that poll is correct. Yet look at the power they wield. The shit is about to hit the fan economically because of the PDs and the more right-wing elements of FF. While they exhort us not to 'throw it all away', the fact is they have squandered every advantage we might have had as a country. It's not unlikely that in devising their pre-election strategy Ahern and FF were feeling that they ought to pull back a little from the exlusively pro-corporate /IBEC agenda. So Ahern had to be taught a lesson - he was losing the faith. There are a lot of nervous FF TDs out there who feel very strongly that there ought to be more focus on ordinary people. FF candidates and party activists are meeting with a lot of anger on the doorsteps. Geraldine Kennedy is on record as saying that the role of the IT is 'to lead and shape public opinion'. It's unlikely she is particularly interested in exposing corruption. If that were the case, the pages of her newspaper would daily be filled with stories of the corruption which is still rampant in Irish public and corporate life. Lazy, Dublin-based journalists would scarcely have to get off their arses to find it if they were interested. But who needs to do any actual work anyway when you can simply regurgitate what it says on that nice PD/FF press release?
by John's mother Thu May 10, 2007 10:15
"none of their support is going to left-wing parties, which is not I'm sure what Frank Connolly and the Irish Times editor would have hoped for."
by spendro Thu May 10, 2007 09:55
"equal to the weekly wage of a Premiership football player. The matters at issue occurred thirteen years ago and the strong likelihood is that no impropriety took place"
by John Thu May 10, 2007 09:04
So you think 82% happy all or most of the time in Ireland is bad.
by Seán Ryan Thu May 10, 2007 03:38
Eurobarometer?
by CJ Thu May 10, 2007 00:17
Ireland 4% - rarely or never happy.
by Chekov Thu May 10, 2007 00:01
"I think the Irish Times are following an agenda in their holier than thou war on corruption, and in particular in their attacks on Ahern. Geraldine Kennedy set out to hijack the election campaign and take out Ahern. The question that should be asked is why."
by Pro Dev - Irish Political Review Group Wed May 09, 2007 21:30
It is not enough to look at this issue from a journalistic perspective. I think the Irish Times are following an agenda in their holier than thou war on corruption, and in particular in their attacks on Ahern. Geraldine Kennedy set out to hijack the election campaign and take out Ahern. The question that should be asked is why.
by John Wed May 09, 2007 21:22
May I direct you to the most recent Eurobarometer survey on the subject.
by Seán Ryan Wed May 09, 2007 21:08
Despite making the argument that the Irish Times only deals in statistics and percentages and not in reality, John has himself climbed into the very same holed boat and has sunk himself too - by only dealing in statistics and percenages himself.
by John Wed May 09, 2007 20:20
An excellent article and spot-on. Its not just the Irish Times continual smear campaign against the Taoiseach, its their invention of 'bad news' and their suppression of 'good news' .
by Slim Jim - Jimmy Magee's memory men Wed May 09, 2007 17:34
The Irish Political Review Group are one of the many faces of the Aubane Historical Society, formerly the British and Irish Communist Organisation. Theres a thread about their history, under the title 'From Peking to Aubane' elsewhere on Indymedia. Defending Bertie, and CJH as well, by the way, is some going for an organisation that used to be Maoist supporters of the UVF. But hey, its a wonderful world out there folks.
by Chekov Wed May 09, 2007 16:52
This article is fundamentally mistaken. The thing is the Mahon tribunal has a very narrow remit - it can only investigate the various payments and planning decisions which it was established to look into. The thing is that Bertie Ahern's answers to some of these questions, while exonerating him from the accusations that he took money from Owen O'Callaghan have raised other questions. The tribunal is not allowed to investigate these other questions. The media should have every right to point out the fact that his explanations are not at all credible.
by 13th Duke of Wybourne Wed May 09, 2007 16:50
The Sindo has shown that Bertiegate is the work of the Provo's through Frank Connolly and the MI5 through the Irish hating Mail.
by Seán Ryan Wed May 09, 2007 16:32
I agree that the media is a large part of the problem. |
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (221 of 221)
Jump To Comment: 221 220 219 218 217 216 215 214 213 212 211 210 209 208 207 206 205 204 203 202 201 200 199 198 197 196 195 194 193 192 191 190 189 188 187 186 185 184 183 182 181 180 179 178 177 176 175 174 173 172 171 170 169 168 167 166 165 164 163 162 161 160 159 158 157 156 155 154 153 152 151 150 149 148 147 146 145 144 143 142 141 140 139 138 137 136 135 134 133 132 131 130 129 128 127 126 125 124 123 122 121 120 119 118 117 116 115 114 113 112 111 110 109 108 107 106 105 104 103 102 101 100 99 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 90 89 88 87 86 85 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1As a sitting TD , the chair of the IAWM, a leading member of PB4P etc, Richard Boyd Barrett is a busy man and very hard to reach Rita.. I have tried to contact him on other issues - such as the IAWM's support for the CIA-backed Syrian and Libyan " rebels "- on several occasions ,but have never received a reply from him.. I note your party affiliation. Richard is also a member of the SWP so you might find it easier to contact him yourself on this issue ,which seems to be a very important one.. I haven't been able to find anything about it anywhere else on the net. More details would be very welcome.
Hi I have just posted up on my wall on face book where Alan shatter and Oireactas in the upper house are signing a bill to get FOI on your health details, we have to stop it, if you can get this message to Richard Boyd Barrett, it has been handed in to Oireactas on 29th dec 2012 Friday
If strong moral power can exist, indeed persist as in China and pre-Gorbachev Russia, does this in some way undermine marxist theory about ruling ideas in society filtering down from the superstructure. "The ruling ideas of any society are the ideas of its ruling class."
Granting the historical fact that the RCC has sided with the powers temporal in many societies (Constantine's decision to become Christian and make it the official religion of the ailing Roman empire was the first such instance) nevertheless there have been times of oppression where the RCC and other churches seeped down into the substructure (catacombs) and persisted with an anti-superstructural furtive alternative moral system. In the Polish Solidarnosc movement of 1970-1990 this alternative trade union/popular education/samizdat substructural alternative system struggled to become eventually part of the superstructure again.
I pose a question of basic epistemology for marxists: where do ideas come from? [epistemology = the philosophical thinking about knowledge and its veracity] It's not a theoretical question, because on another thread it has been alleged that ideas on human rights prevalent in the contemporary world have no spiritual/church origins but come from human beings alone.
Maybe on the matter of independence for Scotland the using up of natural gas deposits will also undermine the wish to break free of the UK.
It would be great if Scotland did not have to mobilise in arms against England in order to be independent. If only it could all be decided sensibly with a referendum!
Britain might allow Scotland some local autonomy, but it is unlikely that it will allow it to pursue an independent foreign policy. I am with Bronterre on this point.
If Scotland acquiesces that will be an indication of the depth (or lack) of national feeling on this question.
This is not to say that moral questions are not important. As indicated by Pat Walsh in a recent issue of the Irish Political Review, Stalin was wrong to assume that power rests only with those with battalions. The Pope has power as head of a world wide religion. The very fact that he has no battalions adds to the moral force of what he says whatever one might think of his pronouncements. He has an influence across nations which few other world leaders have.
So Scotland and Wales will have to mobilise themselves militarily to prove the ultimate test of nationhood? Can't they simply have self-determining referends? By your nationhood standard Stalin was probably logical when asking How many divisions has the Pope?
"The ultimate test of a nation is its ability to mobilise itself in arms.".
Those of us who are pacifists would have to strongly disagee with you. You should read Jonathan Schnell's "The Unconquerable World"
if you get the chance.
Turps, I suppose the ultimate test of a nation is its ability to mobilise itself in arms. The unionists in the north and the nationalists in the South passed this test.
Are Scotland and Wales separate nations? There are cultural differences between them and the English, but in my view their claims are less clear cut than the Ulster unionists for the reason mentioned above.
Bronterre, I think we will have to agree to disagree on some points. While Fianna Fail is not perfect we think it is worthwhile engaging with it while reserving the right to criticise it. The Irish State has gone out to attract US capital in order to create high value jobs in this country. I don’t accept that the country has subordinated itself to American capital. In some cases (e.g. Digital in Galway) when the multinational left the expertise gained by Irish people working in Digital was used to create new Irish owned companies.
I agree that Britain has dangled the carrot of a United Ireland as a means to have greater influence on politics in the Republic of Ireland.
Bronterre, the common ground between us is our opposition to the revisionist project in academia and the media. As I suggested in the Pearson thread I hope you will continue to support us in our attempts to undermine this revisionist project despite your disagreements with us on other matters.
As I outlined above Fianna Fail shows its loyalty to the Anglo-American empire by allowing Shannon to be used for torture flights and troop transfers, by Irish membership in Echelon, the 'Anglo-Saxon' spy agency, and by subjugating the Irish people to Anglo-American economics. Fianna Fail have used state power to implement Anglo-American neoliberal economic policy resulting, for instance, in those unable to afford medical care dying because they can't access procedures readily available to those with money.
And Fianna Fail by being the main player in the Belfast Agreement ensured that the process of subjugating all Ireland, politically and economically, to the Anglo-American empire is well under way.
The notion that the people of the 26 counties voted for the Good Friday Agreement is false. The British ruling class do not allow entities outside the United Kingdom to change structures within it. The people in the 26 counties modified the constitution to facilitate the Agreement. While the change to Articles 2 and 3 received most attention Article 29 was also altered. It diminished Irish sovereignty and allows the British Government and its sub agencies, through the cross-border bodies, to have power over Irish social and economic policy. This renegotiation of the Irish connection to England was successfully carried out under Fianna Fail leadership. The political climate for such an abdication of sovereignty was created by revisionism and all the spurious arguments for the two-nations theory.
Fianna Fail is playing a comprador role in subjugating all of Ireland to imperial economic and political control. Those who support Fianna Fail such as BICO/Aubane and Senator Harris are loyal to this imperial project.
The unionist population has paradoxically behaved like a nation separate from the G Britain they passionately cling to in UK 'unity' - but are unionists provincial rather than national? If they wish to cease being a 'province' (they often call Ulster a province, to the wry bemusement of Cavanites, Donegallites and Monaghanites) would they have the same moral claim as Scotland and Wales to separate nationhood?
It’s not easy to summarise the two nations theory as developed by the B&ICO in a couple of sentences. The different systems of land tenure enabled tenant farmers in the North to accumulate capital and facilitated the development of the linen industry. This was impossible for the rack rented peasantry in the South. This was not the only determinant of a separate nationality but was an important one.
If you don’t accept that there is a separate nation in the North how do you explain the political behaviour of Ulster unionism in the last 100 years? In my view it has behaved as a separate nation even to the extent of asserting this by force of arms against the British state.
You say Aubane failed to notice that Britain is a junior partner in American imperialism and yet yesterday in one of my posts I mention this very fact!
As I have said I regard your accusation that the IPR/Aubane is giving aid to Irish empire loyalists as a joke. No one has done more to combat revisionism: e.g. exposing Peter Hart’s books; confronting the media (the Irish Times and RTE) publishing books on patriots such as Sean Moylan and Sean O Hegarty etc etc.
What have you done?
The 'triumph of the GFA' whether imperialist or otherwise was endorsed by huge majorities in two referenda 72 per cent in NI and 92 per cent down here. So different from the treaty vote in the first Dail 57-64. So in the two referends the people on this island exercised self-determination. If we want a unified state (St. Augustine: make us united but not yet) we'll have to work steadily for mutual understanding, and let time and god do the rest.
Aubane/BICO's political stance is confused and contradictory.
To assert that land tenure determines nationality is absurd.
The 'two nations theory' type of thinking was, and is, a longtime imperial ploy (see the link above re India) and is a basic theme of revisionist thinking. And this thinking and propaganda created the political climate that led to the Belfast agreement, which gives a veto to Unionism on Irish self-determination.
The so-called 'pan-nationalist front', including its key players, Fianna Fail and Irish America, was instrumental in the Anglo-American empire's triumph in Ireland known as the Good Friday Agreement. (And Britain at this point is the junior partner in the empire, something Aubane has failed to notice).
The use of Shannon as a key logistical node in the empire's torture and violence ventures, the membership of Ireland (all of it) in the 'Anglo-Saxon' Echelon intelligence and surveillance agency, the subjugation of Irish labour power to exploitation by U.S capital... just a few of Fianna Fail's collaborative efforts to aid the Anglo-American ruling class.
Fianna Fail's move north is part of the overall subjugation process. Those who support Fianna Fail, including Senator Harris and Bico/Aubane are colluding in this imperial attempt to control the Irish political economy, and are acting to the detriment of the Irish people.
Harris was not appointed to the Senate because of one appearance on TV. Ahern was well aware of Harris's pro-imperial, anti-republican history. He rewarded Harris because Harris, like Ahern and Fianna Fail, is fearlessly on the side of power, property and privilege.
Supporting Ahern while attacking Harris shows the confusion in the political thinking of BICO/Aubane. Rallying to the 'Legion of the Rearguard', and the 'Soldiers of Fortune' is giving aid, encouragement and comfort to the Irish empire loyalists. You are in the same camp as Harris. And wearing a green cloak cannot hide this.
The two nations theory as developed by the B&ICO does not say that the North is a tribal conflict or that if the imperialists leave there will be bloodshed
Although I accept that divide and rule policies are an old tactic of imperialism, there is an internal basis for a separate nation in Northern Ireland arising out of the different systems of land tenure in both parts of the island as well as cultural differences. The pamphlet which expounded the two nations theory – The Economics of Partition - begins with a quote from Peadar O Donnell: “Partition arises out of the uneven development of capitalism, sentiment won’t remove it.”
At different times in its history Ulster unionism has shown itself capable of asserting its nationality in opposition to the British State. It is not merely a product of imperialism.
As indicated the right of nations to self determination is not absolute. Also, nations can express their right to self determination in different ways. The Irish (predominantly Catholic) nation in the South fought for independence. The nation in the North wished to remain part of the United Kingdom.
De Valera, in practice – if not by his rhetoric - accepted partition. He refused calls by Northern nationalists for Fianna Fail to organise in Northern Ireland. He also denied representation by Northern nationalists in the Dail. His thinking (rightly or wrongly) was that the Free State was fragile. It had not been consolidated and in such circumstances politics in the North was a distraction.
When the North blew up in 1969 the successors to de Valera failed to respond in a competent way. They could not decide whether they wanted to aid the Catholic minority defend themselves against the loyalist mobs or use the crisis to advance the cause of a United Ireland. It succeeded in neither objective. Jack Lynch allowed himself to be bounced by the British ambassador into bringing Haughey and Captain James Kelly to trial for implementing government policy.
Fianna Fail suffered an internal collapse as a result. Indeed the national culture of the country was undermined and this led to historical revisionism. The country became embarrassed by its own culture. This is the revisionist project which the IPR/Aubane is opposing. Revisionism has extended from academia into the mainstream media.
Harris is an arch revisionist. However, he was not appointed to the Seanad for that reason. It was because he dissented from the media consensus opposing Bertie Ahern. The revisionists within the media oppose Fianna Fail because it has been the party that has consistently developed the State away from the influence of Britain (e.g. Bunreacht na hEireann, repossession of Treaty ports in 1938 and neutrality during the second World War).
Britain’s interest in Northern Ireland is as a means to exercise influence over politics in the South. I agree that there are dangers in the current political settlement in an increase in British influence in the South.
Finally, the idea that Aubane/IPR is colluding with British imperialism is a joke. Aubane/IPR has done more than anyone, including Sinn Fein, to oppose the revisionist project in our history.
'Two nations' theory is an age-old imperialist ploy. And its role in Irish politics should be viewed in this context.
http://india_resource.tripod.com/hist-2nation.html
The two nation nonsense basically says: its a tribal conflict and if we, the imperialists leave, bloodshood will follow. This, or some variant of it, is a standard ploy of imperialisms. Pick up any newpaper and see its latest version in Iraq.
To think for a split second that Fianna Fail and its leadership is 'socialist' is laughable. To think that Fianna Fail stands for the self-determination of the Irish people is equally ludicrous.
Eoghan Harris has worked ceaselessly to defeat the Irish freedom movement. His appointment to the Senate by the leader of Fianna Fail, Ahern, is a reward for his anti-republican, pro-imperialist politics.
To base one's position of whether Ireland should submit to the empire on whether the Catholic church is strong or not, or on whether economic conditions in the 'South' are good or not, is so simple-minded that it does not merit a response.
The Belfast Agreement is a great success for the Anglo-American empire. It involves the subordination of all of Ireland, North and South, economically and politically, to this imperial design. Fianna Fail played a key role in all this, and its move north is part of the imperial project.
'Two nations' propaganda over 20 or so years paved the way for giving the Unionist minority a veto on Irish self-determination.
Supporters of Fianna Fail, such as Harris and Bico/Aubane are colluding with the imperial control of the Irish people. And propounding a shallow green nationalism is a cover for this project of collusion.
Well you've answered, though I'm not satisfied altogether. Glad to learn you agreed with Solzhenitsyn's revelations about the Gulag when his books came out. Don't know anything about the economic theory of the 'socialist commodity' so can't comment there. I doubt that state marxist economics will appeal to many people nowadays since it failed in the USSR and Mao's China, and people in N. Korea would prefer bread to A-bombs any day.
When I said Fennell was a loose cannon Irish nationalist I didn't intend contempt, only to state he thought his own thing about nationalism and other matters then and now, and seems to have a lot of strings to his bow - hard to keep up with his racing thoughts. It kind of seems a strange route he travelled from the old Sunday Press to the now IPR. ( I get it from Books Upstairs sometimes, but I'd never join you on account of your, eh...colourful past and liquorice allsorts present.)
I seriously distance myself from you on attitudes to Stalin. You are a bit blase when you say he had interesting things to say about nationalities in Russia. Look man, he used mass deportation against certain ethnic groups, mass imprisonment and mass executions.
Fair dos that you don't empathise with Myers and Harris. FF 'socialism' at least has its humourous side and I know some sincere neighbours who will vote that party until they die.
Some of the questions relate to before I became a member (1983). In general, I am reluctant to go into too much detail because you could spend your life trying to defend this or that position 30 years ago or more. In the meantime the world moves on and there are more pressing matters in the here and now to deal with. Below is a brief response to your questions in the same order you posed them:
1) To put it mildly your question is loaded. Articles that appeared in our publications on Stalin were never like those in CPI – ML publications (hail the glorious life of Joe Stalin etc). However:
a)Stalin was put in charge of the Bolshevik commission on nationalities and wrote some interesting material on the national question. (Many mainstream academics such as Robert Conquest, acknowledge his expertise on this question).
b)In the disputes between Stalin and Trotsky B&ICO found Stalin’s positions more coherent. Trotsky was certainly not a liberal alternative. Indeed, he was more authoritarian than Stalin.
c)Regarding the Gulags, the B&ICO denounced Khruschev’s criticism of Stalin as lacking any substance. The B&ICO’s position was that the most substantial criticism of Stalin was from Solzhenitzn. We published numerous sympathetic reviews of Solzhenitzn’s books in the 1970s (in Problems of Communism).
d)On economics we rejected the Khruschev revisionist new economics. We rejected the idea that the “socialist commodity” was a Marxist concept.
2) Yes, it is indeed an open question whether the country is better off with the collapse of the RCC. The problem with the liberalism in this country is that it was not fought for. A kind of mindless liberalism has entered the vacuum as a result of the internal collapse of the RCC.
3) The problems with commemorating the Irish soldiers in the first world war is that the advocates of this most definitely buy into a pro-imperialist position. Secondly, what are we commemorating? In my view most of them were victims of poverty (although some went in a spirit of adventure like Tom Barry). Commemorating them is, in effect, endorsing a British view of the war. The IPR does not accept this view.
4) Is Bertie Ahern a socialist? I don’t know. Fianna Fail is an all class alliance. There are “socialist” as well as capitalist aspects to its policies.
5) Describing Desmond Fennell as a loose cannon is a bit contemptuous. Fennell was an early exponent of a two nations theory (he claims he arrived at this independently of the B&ICO and it was completely different in form). Nevertheless it recognised the substance of Ulster unionism.
6) The Irish Political Review has contempt for Myers and Harris.
Interesting candid explanation for B&ICO turnarounds, JM. A few questions, and this is not a comprehensive response to the above controversy:-
1. What do you and friends think about the tyrannical murderous and soul-destroying regime of Joseph Stalin, whose writings inspired you in the 1970s? Was Solzhenitsyn right in his observations of Stalin's Russia?
2. The ideological power of the RCC is much diminished - but what has partly filled its place? Is this qualitatively any better?
3. Can we in the republic commemorate the Irish soldiers who died in the Great War without buying into the British imperialist interpretation of that war? Will this bring us closer to the trust of Ulster Unionists who have bought that historical interpretation?
4. Bertie has said he's a socialist - is there any evidence to justify the assertion?
5. I find the loose cannon Irish nationalist Desmond Fennell an unlikely bedfellow of the B&ICO remnant. He defended the Irish nationalism you people steadily attacked in past years. How come he happens to be writing and publishing books with your lot?
6. Any brief comments on two infamous turnabouts, Myers and Harris? Have they anything in common with your group attitudes?
It is arguable that racism is inherent in all imperialisms, but Athol books has made a convincing case that it is inherent in British Imperialism (see Hitler’s English Inpirers by Manuel Sarkisyanz).
Does defending the unionist population’s right to national self determination in the 1970s make one an apologist for British imperialism? I don’t think so. Of course, the right to national self determination is not absolute. If Northern Ireland remains part of the United Kingdom the national rights of the minority Catholic population will be denied. If, on the other hand, there is a United Ireland, the national rights of the Protestant population will be overridden.
From a socialist point of view the question is: what is in the interests of the working class?
In the 1970s conditions for the working class in the United Kingdom were better than those in the Republic of Ireland. The Republic was also dominated by the Catholic Chuch (e.g. no contraception, divorce etc). Also, British imperialism appeared at the end of its tether. Prime Minister Heath saw Britain’s future as part of the European community. In those circumstances we advocated integration of the North with the UK.
But to quote John Maynard Keynes: “when circumstances change, I change”.
Since the 1990s conditions for the working class in the South have improved. In particular pension provision is more generous than the UK. British imperialism has found a new role for itself as the junior partner of American imperialism. The UK has adopted an obstructive role in Europe and the Catholic Church is no longer the power that it was in the South.
The B&ICO and the IPR have been consistent all along. Northern Ireland is a failed political entity. No internal solution is viable in the long term. The choice is between movement towards the UK or the Republic. Under current circumstances, particularly with Fianna Fail’s recent moves to organise in the North, we are sympathetic to a movement towards the Republic.
However, any moves towards a United Ireland should not be at the expense of abandoning the anti-imperialist culture of the Republic. It should not require a re-writing of history in the interests of British imperialism. The Southern State should not be required to celebrate the blood sacrifice of the Somme, since the foundation of the Irish State had its origins in 1916 which rejected the view that Germany was our enemy.
Ireland 4%
Me 94%
They'll probably commit me for 'Obsessive Delusional Elation' :-)
(That's what Druidry does to One).
Jack Lane was a member of the Stalinist B&ICO and an apologist for British Imperialism. I consider any form of Imperialism to be innately
racist-however, I admit I have yet to find a full-blown racist remark in Lane's writings.
Don't gloat, though-where I come from Stalinism and British Imperialism are nothing to be proud of....
(Were you threating legal action?).
Two other essential features of Bunreacht were 4. Separation of powers of legislature and judiciary 5. universal franchise
Three liberal items in Dev's constitution: 1. provision for referendum to change it 2. Judicial review of imprisonment 3. Naming of religious minorities incl Jews, but not Muslims due to insufficient numbers then.
Franco's Spain criminalised Protestants, and as for Jews...
The accusation that Jack Lane made a racist remark in a publication is a very serious charge. “Yello” was not able to substantiate it. Now we have a repetition of the allegation.
Please give references and quotes to back up the allegation or, alternatively, have the decency to withdraw it.
John dodged the question immediately. He throws a tantrum when Major McDowell makes racist remarks about the Irish in
a private conversation (and keeps repeating it) , but ignores it when Jack Lane does it in a magazine intended for public circulation.
Cognitative dissonance in action.
You read about people like Lyndon Larouche, Gerry Healy and other political cultists in the news, but it's quite a shock
to find a group of them operating in Millstreet..
And John, Denis O'brien will be writing a cheque for your thirty pieces of silver soon.
Who should Jack Lane apologise to and why?
The British and Irish Communist Organisation in 1973 had no obligation to defend or praise de Valera.
Incidentally, I find it very encouraging that you should refer to de Valera as a champion of Irish democracy and the greatest Taoiseach. Such sentiments are rarely found outside the pages of the Irish Political Review.
The standard view is that de Valera was a narrow minded Catholic. And yet it was de Valera who called for an end to the Fethard-on-sea boycott, in contrast to Fine Gael. Neither did he support the fascist side in the Spanish Civil War.
The 1937 Constitution is given as an example of de Valera’s Catholicism, but it was opposed by Fine Gael because it was not Catholic enough. The Irish Times opposed it not on liberal grounds but because it was a further step in loosening the imperial connection.
The fact that a distorted view of de Valera’s legacy has achieved currency is not the fault of Jack Lane or the B&ICO. It is the responsibility of Fianna Fail which has been in power for the bulk of the period since the death of de Valera in 1975.
When is Jack Lane going to apologise for likening our greatest Taoiseach, a champion of Irish democracy, to Uganda's bloody dictator? I don't think Brian Lenihan would like that at all.....
Where have all the "yellos" gone?
What has happened to the little fella and his pseudonyms? The last that was heard of him was more than 3 months ago. He was given an errand by Jack Lane (see posting of 30/6/07) to produce evidence to support his accusation that the Irish Political Review “attacks people because of their religion and ethnicity (Mansergh, etc)”.
But no sign of “yello” since! Could the “BICO/Aubane arsonists” (see “cat’s-outta-debag” posting of 27/6/07) have burned down the University library where the evidence was to be found? Maybe he didn’t get to the library at all. Perhaps he was bludgeoned to within an inch of his life by “30 pamphlets” “(look at what happened to Roy Foster!)”. Worse still could the Official IRA have discovered his true identity a quarter of a century after it had beaten a friend of his mother (see “yello” posting of 29/6/07) and subjected him to a vicious scatological slagging because he “dared to criticise” Alvey and Clifford.
It’s all very puzzling. He wanted so much to discuss the IPR with other people “like grown-ups” but when the opportunity arose there was just silence.
“Nationalism is the curse of the labour movement in Southern Ireland…It has been assumed that a national struggle for self-determination is automatically progressive and deserves the support of the working class,and in fact should be carried out by the working class if the national bourgeoisie are not up to the task.
“This view persists despite a host of great fighters against British imperialism who will go down in history as the most rabid reactionaries of the 20th century, like General Grivas, General Amin ,De Valera to name but three contemporary examples".
Jack Lane, "The Rights of Nations and the Duties of Communists". The Irish Communist, October 1973, pg. 26.
Eoghan Harris was made a senator for writing the same sort of stuff John Martin wrote.
John Martin of IPR wrote:
"In this election I will be voting Fianna Fail for the first time. I don't consider this an abandonment of my socialist principles."
So you believe Bertie is a socialist???
Dear 'Yello',
I asked you to back up your accusation about the IPR re Martin Mansergh and you have ignored my question. I think you have done so for the very good reason that you cannot find any evidence for your accusation. I cannot therfore take you seriously.
Martin Mansergh and the IPR have fundamentally different views on Irish history and politcs but I am sure both would agree that religion or ethnicity has nothing whatever to do with those different views.
The differnces are simply much more importtant than that. I am sure he appreciates that as much as the IPR does.
Dear Mr. Lane:
First of all, thank you for abstaining from the bullying scatology of your associates Clifford and Alvey.
This is part of the problem:
"Given that she (Bowen) spied for a foreign power against this state, why should
she be claimed as an Irish writer? Her novels were a contribution to
English literature. That she is still defended by various influential
Irish academics, including Dr Mansergh, testifies to a collapse of
faith in the national tradition on the part of what might be called the
Irish intelligentsia. " Unpublished letter Apr. 13, 2004.
Why is Alvey saying Bowen should be expelled from the Irish canon and not, as the other poster
pointed out, Francis Stuart? Isn't an artist's ethnicity too complex (Is Kafka German,Austrian,Czech or Jewish?) to be reduced to such xenophic bullying? And Isn't such an attitude exceedingly dangerous at the time of a peace process in the North and the slow assimilation of Nigerians, Poles, Koreans into the "national tradition"? And what is so terrible about respecting the English national anthem during a match we won? (I'm sure similiar sentiments appeared in the Examiner and the Independent-are they part of a British conspiracy too?) Surely someone who worked for Haughey (god knows why) would fit into Alvey's narrow "national tradition"?
This thread is about (alleged) Irish Times bias against Fianna Fail, and I admit we have wandered slightly off the point. Perhaps Indymedia will open up a new thread where we can discuss the IPR and the problems people have with its views like grown-ups.
Who is she anyway?
Beverly Cooper Flynn
Beverly Flynn
Mrs. Gaughan
Mrs. Flynn Gaughan
An taoiseach aleays address her as Beverly Cooper Flynn. Why?
'Yello' lists his allegations against the IPR and says:
' The accusations against the Irish Political review group are:
1-The publication attacks people because of their religion and ethnicity (Mansergh, etc.)'
So this is his/her number one accusation and must be the most serious.
Everything I or anyone else connected with the IPR ever said about Martin Mansergh (and he about us) is published and easily available.
Could 'yello' point to any evidence in it for his accusation?
"The author has an honours degree in Economics and Politics and is a fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland. He has worked as a Financial Controller, Director and General Manager and is currently a part owner of an Irish Manufacturing Company."
Such a person is also likely to be a strong supporter of Fianna Fail, and an opponent of "big government" (such as the Mahon Tribunal,
perhaps?).
"Frank Zappa" (loved "Peaches En Regalia",by the way!) would be better of reading "Fortnight" or the "irish Democrat" (the one P.B. Ellis writes for) than the tedious Irish Politcial Review.
It'll be interesting, nevertheless, to see how they turn Beverly Cooper-Flynn and John Ellis into helpless victims of the evil Brits....
Brendan Clifford, Jack Lane and myself are very far from being elusive. Unfortunately you missed the launch of my recent book. But I attach a picture of the front cover of the book.
Why not visit the Athol Books website http://www.atholbooks.org
You can find out more about the group and even order a copy of my book on line as well as many other books, pamphlets and magazines. You know it makes sense!
Literature of the group is also available from such prestigious bookshops as Books Upstairs opposite Trinity College Dublin.
The following is from the book’s cover and includes a brief biographical note:
"This book is a review of Karl Marx’s Das Kapital from a businessman’s perspective. The author gives a clear concise summary of the ideas contained in the three volumes of Marx’s classic work and then subjects them to criticism.
Das Kapital describes the laws of motion of the capitalist system. Marx had very little to say about the transition from capitalism to communism and still less about what a communist society might look like. Therefore the relevance of Marx’s work does not stand or fall on the fortunes of the communist movement.
Indeed the author argues that the persistence of the capitalist system and its continued expansion throughout the world makes the ideas of Marx more relevant in the twenty first century than in the nineteenth century when the work was written.
There are two insights of Marx which are more relevant today than they were in his own time. The first is the idea that capitalism socialises production even if ownership remains in private hands. The second insight is the idea that capitalism has a tendency to incorporate the world into its system. The current word for this phenomenon is “Globalisation”.
The author compares Marx’s theoretical view of the capitalist system with his own practical experience and concludes that Marx’s analysis gives a better theoretical framework for understanding the system than modern economics textbooks. Notwithstanding Marx’s errors, which the author discusses, the overall conclusion is that it is far too soon to consign Marx to the dustbin of history.
* * *
The author has an honours degree in Economics and Politics and is a fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland. He has worked as a Financial Controller, Director and General Manager and is currently a part owner of an Irish Manufacturing Company."
Front cover of Book 1.76 Mb