Chairman Ganley amongst the religious…

Great stuff in yesterday’s Irish Times
from Declan Ganley, for in a bid to get away from it all he retreated to a place of religious contemplation. Or more precisely a conference…

…organised by the Catholic John Paul II Society and co-hosted by the pro-life Human Life International group.

And what better venue for the Chairman to assure…

…delegates of his opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage, referring to earlier opening remarks in which he quoted from Pope Benedict’s recent encyclicals, Deus Caritas Est and Spe Salvi, “with their message of God’s love”.

And possibly in a reference to recent events…

He queried whether “we have lost something”

Yes, yes indeed. We… or he… lost Bulgarian and Czech representatives of Libertas… oh… sorry, he meant….

..the address of the pope at St Peter’s Basilica in Rome immediately prior to his election in April 2005. There, the pope criticised a “dictatorship of moral relativism . . . in a world where faith in God is seen as a threat”, Mr Ganley said.

By whom? To whom? I think he protests too much. What I suspect he really means, and those who hold that view, is that their very specific religious viewpoint isn’t reified in this contemporary age. Well. Okay. That’s tough, but hey, those of us on the left are in a similar boat with our viewpoints too. And as we know all too well, there’s little point in whinging about it.

Not that that stopped him…

He went on to criticise “a media obsessed with breaking down the domestic church . . . and the family” and reminded delegates that “the essence of our faith is that all life is sacred”. He concluded: “Yes we must, we must take risks for truth.”

Still, to the main issue that exercises him…

In the later question-and-answer session, he said any guarantees given by the EU on social and ethical issues “were not worth the paper they are written on”, where the European Court of Justice was concerned.

You might think that a bit of an overstatement… ‘not worth the paper they are written on’… so, so unlike those signatures on the Libertas EU party application forms… but this is a land of over-egged puddings, of exaggerated claims… and so…

He continued: “I have been called a liar, a murderer, an arms dealer, a CIA agent, a KGB agent – all of those things, all are filthy lies, but even if [such things were true] it doesn’t change the truth of what we are saying is in this treaty.”

Hmmm… a murderer ? Really? That one passed me by. And KGB agent as well, surely he means the FSB… time moves on Chairman – it really does. But look, am I alone in thinking that the second part of the sentence is not quite the message he should be putting abroad (oops… I mean… of course… in Ireland…). Look at it this way… imagine if someone here were to come out and say, “A chairde, WorldbyStorm has been called a bollix, a plagiarist, an alcohol abuser and a regular listener of dodgy 1980s music – oh yeah, and they say he’s selling documents sent in to the Left Archive on ebay for madly inflated prices – all lies, but even if they’re true [shrugs shoulders] what does that detract from what he’s saying about x, y or z?”. Somehow that’s not the most convincing defense, is it?

And what of this?

He said that on average more than 80 laws a year came from Brussels.

So few ? Great news I think we’ll all agree.

Still, never let a day pass without the Chairman exercising one of his impressive 180º conceptual turns…

However, he also warned one should “never become a Eurosceptic”. The EU, he said, was “a lesson learned from the bloodfest suffered on this continent for hundreds of years”.

Bloodfest?

“The miracle of [the European Union] is that it has ended [the violence and war that] was on the European continent and so is deserving of our support.”

Well and good. Except for those bastards actually in the ‘miracle’ that is represented by Brussels… Well, let’s say he’s not a fan…

LIBERTAS WAS “formally recognised as a political party against the best efforts by Brussels”, [he] said. He “had been reliably told” that officials in Brussels were instructed to find one comma out of place, one “i” not dotted, he said.

Which is great, but how reliably informed? As reliably informed as he was on the issue of his Czech friend and the Bulgarian? Ah well, this one size fits all conspiracy theory expands to deal with that…

Two supporters in eastern Europe had been “nobbled” he said, “but there were plenty of others”.

Yes. No doubt. But shouldn’t he have been a little more circumspect when he dealt with the ‘two supporters’ in the first place – and by the by ‘nobbling’ doesn’t entirely describe a process where his ‘supporters’ appear to be more or less straight-line nationalists unwilling to join a pan-national political grouping, hardly unprecedented on the eurosceptic right. Still, if they were ‘nobbled’ what does that tell us about his judgement, or that of Libertas, to sort friend from foe? And if he didn’t expect such machinations, and no doubt this is a tribute to his good nature and fine capacity to believe the best in people, well surely in light of the following statement he should have…

The problem was, he said, that “the Brussels elite holds you in contempt . . . telling you to vote again. They told the French, the Dutch, and now you, to vote again . . . taking us for absolute fools, uninformed idiots.”

Erm… wasn’t it Libertas who pushed hard on the Commissioner issue, now changed so that we will retain our beloved representation in Brussels? Seems a tad ungrateful.

And look, I have some sympathy for the argument that not a lot has changed. But I have none for the argument that nothing has changed. We’re a global financial crisis away from the first referendum. Like them or not issues that were highlighted by Libertas as existential ones are now, we are informed, to be addressed. There is a point where being told that we are perceived as fools in relation to Brussels machinations becomes a little bit tiresome… people will have every opportunity to judge the worth of the competing arguments at the place which vests them with the greatest authority.

Ireland, he said, “made the most pro-European statement [in rejecting the Lisbon Treaty]. We want Europe to be strong, but it is also going to be accountable.”

Vote No and make the most pro-European statement. Line up a fine array of euro-sceptics and attest that one is euro-philiac. Complain about the Brussels elite but seek greater centralised powers and representation (for yes, he seeks in a way that would cut across national sovereignty, extra powers for the Parliament, and an enhanced Presidency). Red is white. Bad is good.

Libertas will sweep the EU at the next election. Or not. You and me, or at least those of us with the opportunity to vote or not for Libertas candidates, will – quite literally – decide. Speed the day.