Declan Ganley's phoney legal threats

mccafferty cat

Active member
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
137
I've written on several other threads about the bully-boy tactics of Declan Ganley (and his various paid monkeys) whereby his solicitors seem to have a 24-hour printing press producing legal writs which Ganley is instructing them to issue against his more vocal critics. The only remarkable thing about these threats is that Ganley has not had the balls to follow through on a single one of them. NOT ONE.

I am loathe to refer to the lamentable Phoenix Magazine, but they have an article on this issue today which is fully accurate and recounts some of these instances. It may be worth adding to these and grouping all of the various Ganley legal wheezes into one thread for reference.

T. Christian Miller - "Blood Money"

Miller wrote about Ganley in his book, "Blood Money", and was threatened with legal action as a result. This has all been well documented and discussed on this website before.

Result: No legal action of any kind has ever been taken against Miller.

Joe Costello TD

Last December, Labour's Joe Costello was threatened with a libel action for various public claims he made about Libertas funding. Declan Ganley's solicitors demanded an apology and damages. Costello told Ganley to stick it where the sun don't shine.

Result: Ganley has yet to take any action against Costello, despite his threats.


Jim Higgins MEP

Following a number of public statements by Higgins on Ganley's money-making schemes in Iraq, Ganley issued legal threats against Higgins, and orchestrated leak of the solicitors letter to various local papers in the North West.

Result: Unknown thus far. But there have been no subsequent media reports on this particular threat. One would have to assume that this has been dropped, along with all the other cases.

The Irish Times & Colm Keena

Ganley made a series of libel threats against both the IT and Keena following a series of articles published last year, which contained some rather uncomfortable probing of Ganley's profiteering in Iraq, and his connections with various US military personnel.

Result: No action taken.

The Phoenix Magazine

Last year they made inquiries with Libertas about Ganley’s bids for Iraqi mobile phone contracts and later an emergency services network - the same network that Ganley's defenders have used to portray him as some kind of Florence Nightengale character. This prompted paid Libertas monkey John McGuirk to ring their office threatening an injunction preventing publication of the edition.

Result: No action of any kind was taken by Ganley on foot of the article which was published.


Village Magazine

This one was played out pretty well on this website. Village's repetition of Dick Roche's characterisation of Ganley as a "snake-oil salesman", in an article written by Kevin Barrington, as well as other allegations about lucrative money-making schemes which Ganley's companies had in Iraq, led to an attempt at getting an injunction against Village. Barrington had previously posted on Politics.ie (as KevBar) but was eventually banned from the site by Libertas employee David Cochrane, for his persistant attacks on Ganley and others.

Result:
Despite insisting that he had been libelled and was on firm legal ground, Ganley - for some unknown reason - decided to settle this case on the steps of the High Court. He could have taken Village to the cleaners, but for some reason refused to do so. The settlement reached subsequently resulted in the saga over the "interview" with Ganley by a Libertas supporter - the pathetic Bruce Arnold.


Prime Time - Katie Hannon

The relentless and excellent Katie Hannon had the gall to question Ganley about a gentleman names Kosta Trebicka – an investor in Ganley’s Anglo-Adriatic fund who was later murdered in mysterious circumstances. Ganley's first reaction was to deny ever having known Mr. Trebicka - a claim which was subsequently shown to be completelt false. He then threatened to bring a legal sh*t-storm down on RTE.

Result: No legal action of any kind has been taken by Ganley against RTE. Ganley made a complaint to the BCC over the Prime Time programme, which in its report completely vindicated Katie Hannon.


These are the main examples, and doubtless there are others - particularly against politicians. I am personally aware of one instance where paid Libertas monkey John McGuirk claimed to have threatened to sue a private individual (not a politician) for libel and as a result received an apology and a substantial four-figure settlement. This claim was entirely false, and the individual in question had received no communication of any kind from McGuirk.

On the whole, the tactics of Libertas seem to be two-fold:

- Threaten any and all critics with legal action, with the aim of silencing them. (most of the cases above)
- In some instances, the legal threat is completely concocted as a publicity stunt - as was the case with Jim Higgins and, to a lesser extent, Village Magazine.


Ganley might be a liar and a snake-oil salesman - but he is not stupid. He knows that to bring any of the above cases to the High Court would eventually expose his business affairs, and those of Libertas, to a very uncomfortable degree of scrutiny.
 


ballot stuffer

Well-known member
Joined
May 21, 2007
Messages
1,504
I believe McGuirk threatened Gay Mitchell with something similar at a public meeting of all places. He was promptly put back in his box by Mitchell.
 

Tigeress

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
27
Are you the delegated FG rep here for the Ganley/Libertas stuff? Is this the 'job' you were given? You don't seem to post on much else? Do you have a view, for example, on what Evo Morales said yesterday?

He is perfectly entitled to write about whatever subject he wants TA. You seem very obsessed in trying to defend this guy.

Great post MacCafferty Cat, just shows he is all hot air. You say one word against Ganley and he'll threaten to you.

Gay Mitchell got McGuirk brilliantly at some public meeting a few months ago when he totally re-buffed a comment he made and made McGuirk look like the money side kick he is.

Also if Ganley felt he was defamed by Higgins, why did he leak the Solicitors letter which repeated the claims? That's just putting the information which he felt was so damaging to repututation out in public again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: myk

Cyberspaced

Active member
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
122
They love their Libel so they do ,Libertas. Shame they never issue proceedings. I'd love to see the case unfold in public.
 

CookieMonster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
33,861
Gay Mitchell got McGuirk brilliantly at some public meeting a few months ago when he totally re-buffed a comment he made and made McGuirk look like the money side kick he is.
No, Gay Mitchell didn't get McGuirk brilliantly. Gay Mitchell made the false claim that Ganley was being backed by the CIA, McGuirk challenged him on it, but rather than coming up with any proof to back up his claim Mitchell hid behind his parliamentary immunity.
 

oceanclub

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
1,300
Website
oceanclub.blogspot.com
Are you the delegated FG rep here for the Ganley/Libertas stuff? Is this the 'job' you were given? You don't seem to post on much else? Do you have a view, for example, on what Evo Morales said yesterday?
TA, I thought your article about Morales was excellent (I couldn't give you rep, as I'd already given you some recently)..

However, what on earth does Morales have to do with Ganley? People are perfectly entitled to post about what they want on a forum, and are not obliged to also post about subjects they aren't interested in.

P.
 

Tigeress

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
27
No, Gay Mitchell didn't get McGuirk brilliantly. Gay Mitchell made the false claim that Ganley was being backed by the CIA, McGuirk challenged him on it, but rather than coming up with any proof to back up his claim Mitchell hid behind his parliamentary immunity.
Au contrare, I think he shut up McGuirky pretty swiftly.

Libertas should change their name to Libeltas!!
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2007
Messages
18,709
He is perfectly entitled to write about whatever subject he wants TA. You seem very obsessed in trying to defend this guy.

Er... Where did I defend Ganley there? I asked the poster why he doesn't post on much else, I didn't say he wasn't entitled to post on this. I know a command of English seems to be optional nowadays, but seriously...
 

Tigeress

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
27
Er... Where did I defend Ganley there? I asked the poster why he doesn't post on much else, I didn't say he wasn't entitled to post on this. I know a command of English seems to be optional nowadays, but seriously...

Oh what a good come back......seriously got me there, i'm gonna run off and cry now.

I'm just saying you seem slightly obsessed with defending Ganley. I think I'm entitled to this opinion.
 

Tigeress

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
27
So you don't constantly defend Ganley, jeez someone must be hijacking your keyboard so.
 

Verhofstadt

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
6,037
Website
********************
Are you the delegated FG rep here for the Ganley/Libertas stuff? Is this the 'job' you were given? You don't seem to post on much else? Do you have a view, for example, on what Evo Morales said yesterday?
I don't understand your issue with people focusing on topics that interest them or on which them feel they've something to say.

Do you think there is too much negativity about Ganley/Libertas?
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2007
Messages
18,709
So you don't constantly defend Ganley, jeez someone must be hijacking your keyboard so.
I don't defend Ganley at all. I actually oppose a good chunk of his stated beliefs, though I am in agreement with some bits too. I also think, for the umpteenth millionth time, that Libertas have gone over the top entirely with this pan-European party thing, and are on a hiding to nothing in many places.

I do however oppose a smear factoid campaign (against anyone) which has been orchestrated in advance by people with a political agenda, many of them with the single (and misplaced) aim of discrediting the entire 'no to Lisbon' campaign by discrediting Libertas. There are several here with that agenda, but I'm not playing.
 

myk

Well-known member
Joined
May 21, 2004
Messages
405
No, I simply oppose single-issue obsessives, particularly when they're here with a pre-planned 'brief'.
you are giving out about smears, and yet you are suggesting that a poster is assigned to post issues here by their political party, and you seem to suggested that they are being paid to do it. that is a baseless smear if ever I saw one!

You know well that the OP posts on a number of different topics, not just Libertas!
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2007
Messages
18,709
you are giving out about smears, and yet you are suggesting that a poster is assigned to post issues here by their political party, and you seem to suggested that they are being paid to do it. that is a baseless smear if ever I saw one!

You know well that the OP posts on a number of different topics, not just Libertas!
I'm not suggesting anything about the OP, I certainly never said or thought he was being paid, that's nonsense. I asked a question about his constant attacking both Libertas and this site. He has repeatedly stated in the past that I defend Ganley and Libertas, I do not, I just oppose this type of underhand politics. The attacks on the site, in particular, are always groundless, easily disproved, and yet repeated time and time again, including twice yesterday by this poster.
 

Conor

Moderator
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
5,149
No, I simply oppose single-issue obsessives, particularly when they're here with a pre-planned 'brief'.
You really shouldn't. "Specialists" enrich the site immeasurably - not everyone's a polymath!
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top