Cameron’s legacy: Irish Times gets it wrong





By Anthony Sheridan


His legacy will be defined and blighted by how he left office. Above all he will be blamed for Brexit.

The above is how an Irish Times editorial described the resignation of David Cameron.

Let’s try to figure out how the Brexit referendum ‘blighted’ Cameron’s legacy.

He decided to ask the people of the UK if they wanted to remain or leave the European Union. Now, admittedly, he did so under pressure from UKIP but that’s realpolitik for you. From what I observed Cameron conducted the campaign in a statesmanlike and honest fashion. Within hours of losing he delivered an impressive speech announcing his resignation – how does this blight his legacy?

Compare this to Irish politicians when they lose referendums. The democratic will of the people is ignored, the result is not accepted, and there are no resignations. The people are patronisingly told that they must have misunderstood the issue and are forced to vote again. Democracy is, in effect, suspended until the government gets its way.

Now lets compare this ludicrous assessment of Cameron’s legacy with how the legacy of the criminal politician Charles Haughey was assessed by former editor of the Irish Times, Geraldine Kennedy, in 2006.

Keep in mind that Haughey was a national traitor responsible for infecting the body politic with the disease of corruption. He plundered the state’s resources for decades and lived on bribes from rich businessmen who were richly rewarded by the criminal at the expense of Irish citizens. He was a ruthless bully and serial perjurer; he was a man who betrayed his wife and family for decades by openly whoring with every slut that came within range of his sleazy presence.

This was Kennedy’s assessment:

On this day, however, it is worth acknowledging that Charles Haughey was the most charismatic figure in Irish politics in living memory. Though small in stature, he had a great presence. He was an astute parliamentarian. He possessed his own particular sense of nationhood. And for good or ill, Mr. Haughey’s character, ambitions, beliefs and flaws are an integral part of the development of this modern State.

Niamh Horan: A chronically uninformed journalist


Irish Independent journalist Niamh Horan tells us that the heroes of 1916 would baulk at the lack of courage shown by Ireland’s leaders of today.

Be that as it may but those 1916 leaders would also baulk at the low standards of journalism operating in the Ireland of 2016.

Ms. Horan is just one of a disturbingly large number of Irish journalists who are chronically uninformed, biased or captured.

In her article Ms. Horan blames global financial interests for the catastrophe visited upon Ireland and its people since 2008. That ‘invasion’ by global interests was, apparently, facilitated by cowardice on the part of Irish politicians.

Ms. Horan then tells us that the (criminal) politician Haughey would never have allowed those nasty financial invaders to damage the interests of Ireland.

I weep for Ireland and its future when I read such tripe.

Here are the facts that Ms. Horan is either ignorant of or chooses to ignore.

Global financial interests have been exploiting the markets since Adam was a boy; there is nothing new about this fact.

The success or otherwise of these global financial sharks depends on the strength of governance of any particular country.

Ireland suffered, and continues to suffer, catastrophic consequences not because global financial interests do what they do but because our political system is irreformably corrupt.

The man who did more than any other to spread the disease of corruption is none other than the man who Ms. Horan so admires, the criminal politician Haughey.

Copy to:
Ms. Horan

Haughey: A political gangster, pure and simple

The vast bulk of comment and opinion expressed in response to the current RTE Haughey drama can be described as delusional drivel.

But even delusional drivel can serve a purpose and in this case it serves a very valuable purpose.

It tells us in very clear terms that the current ruling elite and large sections of the media are still frozen in the warped mindset of the Haughey era that enabled him to engage in a decades long career of criminality and betrayal.

In order to differentiate between the drivel and the brutal reality of what Haughey was and what he represented it will be useful to spell out exactly the true nature of this particular individual.

Haughey was a political gangster, pure and simple. He possessed just one talent – the ability to see an opening for profit when it was presented to him.

And that’s what happened when he decided to get involved in politics in the 1950s. Ireland had finally decided to abandon it’s decades long policy of isolation and in particular its idiotic economic war with the UK.

Haughey and his cronies (the men in mohair suits) recognised the opportunities presented by the progressive economic and industrial policies introduced by Lemass.

Ireland could have gone down another road at the time if the criminal had been stopped but tragically for Ireland and its people, he won out and began to infect the governance of the country with the disease of corruption.

For the rest of his career he plundered the resources of the State without fear of ever being brought to account. The diseased culture he created is still alive and thriving today.

Personally he was an obnoxious individual who betrayed his wife and family, a man who robbed the fund collected to save the life of his best friend, a man who threatened and bullied anybody who stood in his way, a man without principle, courage or morals.

But most of all he was a man who inflicted massive damage on his country and its people while all the time fraudulently posing as a man of the people, a great statesman.

In a functional democracy such political scumbags quickly find themselves behind bars. In Ireland he was protected and assisted by all State agencies in his criminality and honoured with a state funeral when he died.

He is still admired by a disturbingly large number of people, particularly those of the ruling elite and their supporters in the media.

We only have to observe the response to the current drama to see how successful the traitor was in corrupting the judgement, principles and integrity of so many people.

I’ll be writing about a number of those responses in the next while.

The criminal Haughey pleads with the criminal Hussein

From the Attic Archives: Sunday Tribune 17 May 1992

The following quotes are taken from a letter written by the criminal dictator Haughey to the criminal dictator Saddam Hussein dated 29 September 1989.

The letter is a pathetic plea to Hussein to give back some of the money that the criminal Haughey and his corrupt government had committed to support the beef export industry. Larry Goodman, a massive contributor to Fianna Fail funds, was the principal beneficiary of such support.

Of course, the money was never recovered and, as always, Irish taxpayers’ were forced to pick up the tab.

Payments totally about $80 million are at present overdue to Irish companies. I appreciate that this amount is not very large by international trading standards, but the Irish economy is small and my Government is coming under a great deal of political pressure and criticism over the matter because the amounts will eventually have to be met by the Government if they are not otherwise cleared.

I apologise for troubling you about this matter in view of the very many great difficulties with which you have to contend but I am anxious that nothing should be allowed to diminish the excellent friendly relationship which has been so carefully built up between our countries.

If you can be of any assistance in regard to it I would be deeply grateful.

Please accept, Your Excellency, my good wishes for your well-being and for the happiness and prosperity of the Iraqi people.

Charles J Haughey, T.D.

Brendan O'Connor and the bollox Fintan O'Toole

From the Attic Archives

Some quotes from an article by Brendan O’Connor (Sunday Independent, July 20 1997) on the concept of zero tolerance and the criminal Haughey’s appearance at the McCracken Tribunal.

I wonder if Charlie wouldn’t have preferred to go to prison with his honour intact rather than watch the self-righteous mob led by Fintan O’Toole don the war paint and dance around the bonfire gloating.

Charlie may have been a bollox, but no more than any of us are bolloxes.

Bolloxes on a smaller stage maybe but flawed, greedy bollixes all the same.

Sometimes I lie awake at night and I wonder if even Fintan O’Toole is flawed. Maybe even Fintan is a bollox like all the rest of us.

Mary O'Rourke's memoir: Self-serving and delusional

The following review of Mary O’Rourke’s memoir, Just Mary, appears on Amazon.

I really enjoyed this book, the story of Mary’s life and her political career! An honest politician with great ethical principles. So nice to read about someone like this!

Practically all the reviews are in the same vein. The following is my contribution on Amazon.

This book is little more than a self-serving, delusional attempt by O’Rourke to distance herself and her beloved Fianna Fail party from any blame for the economic catastrophe visited upon Ireland and its people.

Ireland’s economic downfall and international disgrace in 2008 was the end result of decades of political corruption principally led by Fianna Fail under the corrupt politician Charles Haughey and his incompetent successors.

O’Rourke was and remains a strong supporter and admirer of Haughey. It was Haughey who first appointed her to ministerial office and she remained a loyal supporter throughout his career and beyond.

O’Rourke’s admiration for the corrupt Haughey is reflected in her decision to dedicate a separate chapter describing a Christmas visit to his home.

This visit took place after Haughey’s corruption had been exposed and suggests that she has more respect and admiration for the traitor than she does for her country and its people.

O’Rourke blames everybody for the economic catastrophe visited upon the Irish people allowing only token, mealy mouthed, admissions that Fianna Fail may have been to any degree responsible.

She blames the global financial crisis, Fianna Fail’s coalition partners, The Progressive Democrats and, most disgracefully of all, the ordinary people of Ireland.

In her own words:

The biggest factor in our decline as a party was the blight of the global recession which hit us in 2008.

There is no escaping the fact that some aspects of their (Progressive Democrats) central philosophy and the concrete measures which this engendered – such as policies on taxation and financial regulation – undermined our effectiveness during a crucial time in government.

But most of all, this arrogant politician blames the people of Ireland (my emphasis).

Banks can be blamed for speculation but they were responding to demands from the people – It is the people who pressed for such financial facilities. Everyone wanted the bigger house, the next holiday the private school for their offspring and so it went on and on.

Throughout the book O’Rourke expresses very little real compassion or anger in response to the events following the collapse of the economy with one glaring exception – when she addresses how the media and ordinary Irish citizens have responded to Fianna Fail’s part in the catastrophe.

When writing about those who dare to criticise her beloved Fianna Fail party her anger is as uncompromising as it is revealing.

The paragraph is worth reproducing in full as it provides us with a clear insight into the delusional world in which O’Rourke operates.

I find it utterly outrageous that it is considered nefarious to be a member, even a grassroots member, of our party and as I write this today, this seems to be the common thread emerging in the media and in public discourse.

I rail against the fact that there are many writers and commentators who in my opinion could be accused of breaching the code of incitement to hatred, in the way in which they write and talk about Fianna Fail.

`Toxic’, `disreputable’, `underhand’: all these adjectives about us are heaped one upon another. I feel it is strongly reprehensible and grossly unfair to the ordinary men and women throughout the country who are the foot soldiers, unpaid, of the party of Fianna Fail.

How dare people cast aspersions upon them? It is as if over all those years, the pent-up hatred of the success of Fianna Fail has cut loose and commentators are giving vent to it, and in a way that completely lacks proportion or even-handedness.

It is nothing short of delusional to suggest that words like `toxic, `disreputable’ and `underhand’ could be used as a basis for accusing writers and commentators of breaching the code of incitement to hatred.

This is particularly so when much stronger words like `corrupt’, `criminal’ and traitorous are entirely appropriate when commentating on Fianna Fail’s political record.

It is nothing short of delusional on a grand scale to suggest, as O’Rourke does, that the negative reaction to Fianna Fail following the economic catastrophe has little to do with the activities of its members and leaders but is entirely down to jealously of Fianna Fail’s success as a political party.

But as delusional as she may be it cannot be denied that O’Rourke is immensely popular with the media and general public.

Her book is a best seller and has received an almost universally positive reaction.

On principle I could not bring myself to add to O’Rourke’s wealth by actually buying the book and so had to wait about two months to obtain it from my local library.

When I finally got my hands on it the librarian asked me to return it as soon as possible as there was a long waiting list.

It is disturbingly ironic that Irish citizens who probably cannot afford to buy the book principally because of the financial devastation caused by O’Rourke’s beloved Fianna Fail are queuing up to read all about her absolute loyalty to that very party.

Indeed, O’Rourke’s popularity within the media and throughout the general public can be seen as a measure of just how far Irish citizens have to go before they grasp the true meaning of democratic accountability.

Mary O’Rourke has more respect for the criminal Haughey than she has for the people of Ireland.

In her recent memoir Mary O’Rourke dedicated a chapter in honour of her long-time friend, the criminal politician Haughey.

I say ‘in honour’ because O’Rourke makes no analysis or comment on the criminal’s career/crimes. The chapter simply relates her cosy Christmas visit to the criminal’s home.

O’Rourke’s visit to Haughey after he had been exposed as a corrupt politician and her decision to dedicate a chapter to the criminal tells us that she has more respect and admiration for the traitor than she does for her country.

She is, in effect, saying to the people of Ireland:

I don’t care what damage Haughey’s criminality and corruption did to you, to your children, to your dreams and ambitions or to your country; I place my loyalty to him above all that is important to you.

Haughey: Degenerate sleazeball

Just came across an article in which television presenter Anne Robinson recalls how the criminal politician Haughey once groped her.

The claim was made by Robinson in a joint interview with her daughter in light of the recent Jimmy Savile abuse revelations.

I think my best experience was with Charlie Haughey, who was then Ireland’s minister of justice.

I like to imagine he went to his grave with my bruises on his hands after he tried to grope me during the 1969 Irish elections.

The incident reminds us that Haughey was not just a criminal and traitor but also a degenerate sleazeball in is treatment of others particularly women.

A party of national interest is required

Excellent letter in today’s Irish Examiner

We need party of national interest

Minister O’Reilly must be congratulated for his wisdom in announcing that the “burden” of cuts must fall on the “better paid” and not the sick and vulnerable.

However, for some strange reason he appears to have difficulty identifying the “better paid”. He, like the rest of his colleagues to date, seem to be searching for them in the wrong places.

His peers in the previous administration lacked the same powers of detection. Could it be that things ‘too close cannot be observed’ as the poet said? It might help Mr O’Reilly if he started by looking at the pay and expenses he and his colleagues enjoy and make comparison with the going rates in other European countries.

He might also factor in the size of our country and economy and the fact that we are effectively bankrupt and dependent on the benevolence of the ECB and the IMF. If he writes it down on two columns, it might help him to focus his mind.

To help him get underway, I suggest he make a sort of remuneration league table of heads of government worldwide. Where would the noble Enda come, he who so graciously accepted a pay cut of €20,000 that brought his salary down to a mere €200,000, leaving him with just over €70,000 or so more than the British and Swedish prime ministers, and even twice as well paid as the prime minister of Spain.

After that he can look at top professionals like doctors and administrators in the health service and compare them, like with like, with their European colleagues.

Only then, and when he and his colleagues do the right thing and the necessary thing, should they take their search for the “better paid” further afield.

Indeed if he really took this exercise with the seriousness it warrants, he might find himself considering a far more important point, which is the inexplicable quiescence of the Irish people in the face of two successive governments who stand unrivalled in modern times for their cowardice, crass insensitivity, greed and sheer neck.

There is a lethal vacuum in Irish politics at the moment, one that should be feared by both government and opposition. It cannot be filled by commentators and pundits.

The country is crying out for a new movement in politics, a party of national interest, that will field candidates in local and national elections and bring something back to Irish politics that seems to have died with the rise of Charles Haughey — a moral compass.

Margaret Hickey
Co Cork

Patriots, criminals and liars

1997: Bertie Ahern speaking at the opening of the Fianna Fail Ard Fheis.

Delegates, Fianna Fail will enforce a new set of standards for all its members.

We will not tolerate any deviation from the benchmarks of honour at local level or Leinster House be it in the past, the present or the future.

No one, no one is welcome in this party if they betray the public trust. I say this and I mean this with every fibre of my being.

2006: Bertie Ahern speaking at the grave of Ireland’s most notorious criminal politician Charles Haughey.

If the definition of a patriot is someone who devotes all their energy to the betterment of their country, Charles Haughey was a patriot to his fingertips.