Author: Anthony

RTEs cowardice seriously damages its credibility

The Brian Cowen caricature stunt which started out as a humourous and harmless stunt has evolved into a very serious matter.The artist, I believe, never dreamed that his/her action would expose RTE as a lapdog of the Government.

Discussing the matter on Today with Pat Kenny, Fianna Fail TD, Michael Kennedy said;

“RTE is there to give serious news items. It’s not a comedy piece…I want it to be balanced, I want it to be unbiased and I want it to be newsworthy, not fickle entertainment.”

I want, I want, I want.

So, we’re clear on what Mr. O’Kennedy and the Government wants, we’re also clear that RTE has no problems or scruples in immediately complying with Government demands.

And keep in mind this is just the latest in a number of cases where RTE were happy to cave in the moment they received a phone call from an angry government.

Last November we saw the outspoken government critic, John Crown, banned from appearing on the Late Late Show and more recently we saw the curtailment of references to Cowen on the Gerry Ryan Show.

But RTE cannot escape the consequences of its actions. I, and I’m sure a great many other people, will never again see its news broadcasts in the same light, particularly if the news report concerns any matter that’s sensitive to Government officials or politicians.

The question will always be in the back of my mind – how much of this report is genuine news and how much is government propaganda?

RTEs craven kowtowing to government bullying has seriously damaged its credibility.

Copy to:
RTE News

Confirmed: The so called Financial Regulator is rotten to the core

Former AIB internal auditor Eugene McErlean confirmed today what we at Public Inquiry have been saying for years (as far back as 2005). He told the Committee on Economic Regulatory Affairs:

“It is my opinion that the Financial Regulator’s report published in December 2004 failed to tell the whole story about overcharging. The report gave the impression that the regulator had acted in the public interest. I think it is relevant to consider that if a whistleblower had not exposed the problem in 2004 then the overcharging practices may have carried on indefinitely.”

This statement makes the following points:

The so called Financial Regulator acted against the public interest by deliberately keeping secret, information that was vital for consumers.

By its actions the so called Financial Regulator was acting in the interest of a bank that was robbing consumers.

By failing to take action against this robbing bank the so called Financial Regulator exposed consumers to potentially great loss.

By failing in its duty to act against this robbing bank the so called Financial Regulator has helped to endanger the international reputation of Ireland.

The so called Financial Regulator has a putrid record of tolerance and facilitation of thieving financial institutions and as Mr. McErlean points out is quite prepared to tolerate theft indefinitely. There is no evidence whatsoever that this policy has changed, we are still waiting for even a single banker to be arrested.

Mary O’Dea, currently acting head of the Financial Regulator, should be sacked immediately. In recent weeks we have heard several so called informed commentators praising this woman because she questioned the mafia style actions of one bank at one meeting after the avalanche of filth had already engulfed and enraged the general public.

She has been a senior director of Ifsra since its establishment in 2003, she is and was fully aware of all its rotten policies that effectively protected corrupt financial institutions and exposed the general public to great loss and has seen the international reputation of Ireland in tatters.

And she’s not the only one who should be fired in disgrace. For years, I’ve had to listen to insulting, condescending, bullshit from a number of departments at Ifsra about so called financial complexity; about secrecy laws, about ‘who the hell do you think you are Mr. Sheridan calling us and asking impertinent questions.

The whole rotten edifice should be cleaned out once and for all and that should include all staff members who knew, by dint of their position, what was going on in this organisation that has betrayed the Irish people.

They will have to be sacked because, clearly, their long and close association with the rotten stench coming from the Irish financial sector has long ago destroyed their sense of morality, a sense of morality that would, in normal people, lead them to immediately resign in shame.

Copy to:
Financial Regulator (so called)

Fragile memento

The opening paragraph in an article by Vincent Hogan in today’s Irish Independent.

In Cardiff Airport yesterday, one brazen Irish rugby supporter faced a complication at check-in. He sought to bring one of the corner-flags from the Millennium Stadium on board his flight as hand luggage.

The ground-staff insisted that this rather conspicuous memento, thieved in the fevered celebrations of Ireland’s first Grand Slam triumph since 1948, needed to be checked in.

“Okay,” the supporter finally relented. “But can you mark it ‘fragile’?”

The Grand Slam

What a game, I watched it at home and like most people was literally on the edge of my seat but also lying on the floor, pacing up and down the living room, perched on the coffee table, running out into the garden in fright and ecstasy, alternatively kissing and shaking my fist at the screen.

Moggy, who is strictly a soccer fan cat, had had enough by the second half and headed for the shed.

When asked was he nervous during the game, that genius Brian O’Driscoll said that it was easier to play than to watch.

Feck, I’d certainly agree with that.

His Excellency Martin Cullen devastated by news of new technology

Don’t believe reports that yesterday’s special Cabinet meeting was held to discuss spending cuts and taxes to gain control of public finances.

I can exclusively reveal that the emergency meeting was demanded by a very distraught Martin Cullen after he watched a report on Six One News (12th item) last Friday.

His Excellency was devastated to learn that Cisco had developed a revolutionary Teleconferencing system that could practically do away with the need to physically travel to ‘very important’ meetings.

In addition to saving millions in expenses the new system is environmentally friendly with Cisco slashing its travel budget by 50% last year thus saving over a hundred thousand metric tons in carbon emissions.

It is reported that His Excellency nearly choked on his caviar on hearing the news and immediately called on Biffo to convene an emergency meeting.

Leaks from the meeting indicate that while most ministers are happy to use the new technology His Excellency is totally opposed.

I’m all for technology, he said, but we also have to think of image. This new fangled machine will not impress the peasants, not if they’re deprived of the sight of their leaders travelling to very important meetings in expensive cars, helicopters and planes.

We’ve got to lead by example, he said, give them something to aspire to.

A law repugnant to democratic principles

The Charities Act 2009 was recently signed into law by President Mary McAleese.

Section 99 of this act makes it a criminal offence to sell a Mass card without the permission of a Catholic bishop.

This law is repugnant to the enlightened democratic principles of most modern states. I believe this law was introduced for one principal reason – to re-establish the lucrative Mass card monopoly to the Catholic Church.

I have written to Mary McAleese challenging her on this matter.

Dear Mrs. President,

You recently signed into law the Charities Act 2009 a section of which makes it a criminal offence to sell a Mass card without the permission of a Catholic bishop.

Part 7, Section 99 (2) of the Act states: “In proceedings for an offence under this section it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved on the balance of probabilities, that the sale of the Mass card to which the alleged offence relates was not done pursuant to an arrangement with a recognised person.”

Clearly, this law is in direct contradiction of Article 48 of the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights which states: “Everyone who has been charged shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.” The principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty is, I believe, one of the fundamental legal pillars of most modern democratic states.

I would be grateful if you could answer the following questions.

Do you agree with the principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’?

Do you agree with the ‘guilty until proven innocent’ section of the Charities Act 2009?

Yours sincerely
Anthony Sheridan

The relevant section.

Section 99. (Charities Act, 2009)

(1) A person who sells a Mass card other than pursuant to an arrangement with a recognised person shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) In proceedings for an offence under this section it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved on the balance of probabilities, that the sale of the Mass card to which the alleged offence relates was not done pursuant to an arrangement with a recognised person.

(3) In this section—

“Church” means the Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church;

“Mass card” means a card or other printed material that indicates, or purports to indicate, that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass howsoever described will be offered for—

(a) the intentions specified therein, or
(b) such intentions as will include the intentions specified therein;

“priest” means a priest ordained according to the rites of the Church;

“recognised person” means—

(a) a bishop of the Church, or
(b) a provincial of an order of priests established under the authority of, and recognised by, the Church;

“sell” includes, in relation to a Mass card, offer or expose the card for sale or invite the making by a person of an offer to purchase the card.

The Pope; worried about 'superstitious' religion

The Pope, apparently, is worried about the growing influence of superstitious forms of religion, what other forms of religions are there? (BBC News)

The very bedrock of Catholicism is based on superstition – demons, devils, miracle performing angels, the magical power of relics, praying to a supernatural entity to win the lotto etc, etc.

He’s also worried about the ‘opposition’, probably Pentecostalism; which is making huge headway all over the world, particularly in Africa.

Perhaps he should consider a crusade.

Time to act against the Catholic Church

Once again the superstitious, medieval mindset of the Catholic Church is endangering the lives of countless people in Africa (BBC News).

The solution to the problem of HIV/Aids lies in a “spiritual and human awakening” and “friendship for those who suffer” according to the Pope.

EU leaders do not agree. Dutch Development Minister Bert Koenders said it was

“extremely harmful and very serious” that the Pope was “forbidding people from protecting themselves”.

French foreign ministry spokesman Eric Chevallier said:

“While it is not up to us to pass judgment on Church doctrine, we consider that such comments are a threat to public health policies and the duty to protect human life.”

Personally, I think it’s time that world leaders acted instead of talking. The Pope and the Catholic Church should be hauled before the International Criminal Court and charged with crimes against humanity.

Fr. Good and the “Anti-Catholic Bigotry League”

From time to time I receive responses to letters published in various newspapers. Religious matters, in particular, seem to trigger strong responses.

I received the following letter from a Fr. James Good in response to my letter regarding a law that makes it a criminal offence to sell a Mass card without first getting the permission of a Catholic bishop.

I’ve reproduced my letter first and then an unedited copy of Fr. Good’s letter to me.

ARTICLE 48 of the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights says: “Everyone who has been charged shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.”

Part 7, Section 99 (2) of the Charities Bill 2009, recently signed into law here, makes it a criminal offence to sell a mass card without the permission of a Catholic bishop. The act states:

“In proceedings for an offence under this section it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved on the balance of probabilities, that the sale of the Mass card to which the alleged offence relates was not done pursuant to an arrangement with a recognised person.

The clear contradiction begs the question: are we living in a liberal democratic republic or a theocracy?

Dear Mr. Sheridan,

I was delighted to see your letter in the Irish Examiner (14.03.09). Since I had not seen a contribution from you for quite some time, I was beginning to fear that you might have departed to meet your Maker. An interesting meeting, indeed.

On the minus side, of course, one could say many things: your little letter, filling a bit of empty space at the foot of a page (as usual), was as bitter and irrelevant as always.

What saddened me, however, was the sight of a supposedly “good” atheist writing to support a MEAN FRAUD. Recent investigations show that the vast majority of Mass Cards sold in shops are legally fraudulent. Could you not perhaps use your God-given gifts to stop THEFT and FRAUD rather than sneering at our government in its effort to eliminate them?

Re-reading my letter of 2nd February suggests that in the intervening three years you have learned nothing about either Mass stipends or a ban on discussion of clerical celibacy. The latter controversy is still ongoing, despite your belief that it is banned.

I notice that your address in the Cork Examiner has dropped the Rock of Eoin. Protection for the writer – from the editor or from the writer?

Yours sincerely
Fr. James Good

Just a few things:

Fr. Good didn’t address the central point of my letter which is that the widely accepted principle of innocent until proven guilty has been reversed by this religious law.

His comment on celibacy concerns a previous letter of mine regarding the ban on theologians from discussing the matter by Pope John Paul II

His comment about my address displays an ignorance of the editorial practice of editing for space.

Fr. Good is also convinced that The Irish Examiner and The Irish Times are supporters of what he calls the “Anti-Catholic Bigotry League” only printing letters from ‘anti-Catholic bigots’ and refusing to print replies. In previous correspondence to me he says:

“The Irish Examiner prints only the letters of anti-Catholic bigots, and refuses to print any reply to these bigots. And of course the newspaper which replaced the Irish Times at the top of the Anti-Catholic Bigotry League is delighted to get nasty little pieces from the Rock of Eoin to fill up small empty spaces in its hate-sheet: that’s why they frequently end up a the end of a page.”

I wonder why editors don’t publish letters from this priest?

Political leadership: low quality, high cost

“Hans Joachim Fuchtel was amazed to find out that while he gets paid €92,000 to represent 280,000 people in Germany, our TDs get more than €100,000 each to represent 25,000 people, plus far more generous expenses.”

(Irish Independent).

Fuchtel would also be amazed at the low quality political leadership that we suffer at such high cost.