Exposing Corruption in Ireland

 

“Cowen’s main failing – apart from notably awful looks, still not regarded as a crippling disability in Irish politics – was his incapacity to indicate convincingly that he believed politics should have anything at all to do with the great unwashed.  (His elitism is commonplace; its transparency less so, and only his own down-home, rough rural manner protected him from political damage.)  Cowen’s every soporific public uttering – muttering, really – carried an implicit message:  “leave it to the professionals.”  Colleagues and journalists encouraged Cowen’s arrogance by constantly assuring him, in public and private, that he was the most intelligent and able of all government ministers, that the nation’s interests were indeed safe in his hands, that he owed no one any explanations."

- Harry Browne, Hammered by The Irish

For all the fuss about where Declan Ganley got his money, what about where the yes campaigners are getting their money this time around? The yes men for round two have regrouped and re-assessed their strategy. They know that politicians are too distant from the people, totally untrustworthy by now. The people need explananations not blind assurances. Celebrities, successful businessmen, sports stars for endorsement. Glosssy ads, expensive bilboards and most of all the threat of what’s to come should the people say "no" once again.

Pat Cox, Brigid Laffan, Martin Mackin and Brendan Halligan. It is Halligan who we will look at today and in particular the Institute of International and European Affairs. Halligans baby. The institute is like an umbrella organisation for the various yes campaigns we see sprouting up around the country. Since the IIEA is listed as a registered charity it avoids paying taxes, but such a perk forbids them from choosing political agendas or say, taking sides in the debate on Lisbon. We should be left in no doubt however, as to how the IIEA would vote on Lisbon II. 

Halligan uses funds he has funnelled into the IIEA to fuel these front runers of the yes campaign: 

• Ireland for Europe
• We Belong
• Generation Yes 
• Women For Europe

1. Ireland for Europe are the farcical group that rolled out Robbie Keane among others to convince us we got it wrong last time. Other patrons include Peter Sutherland and Garret Fitzgerald (Bildeburgers), Dennis Hickie, The Edge, the thief executive of National Toll Roads PLC, etc etc. They are the heavyweights, the ones with the most ads and most people handing out fliers. http://www.irelandforeurope.ie/index.html

2. We Belong use many of the same faces and several extras including Mick Galway, Mary McEvoy and Bill Cullen. Pat Gilroy features again but their tactics are as transparent as his footballers’. There is the lingering threat of what would happen should we vote no. Yes means jobs and jobs are what Ireland needs in the current climate. Cringe when Mick Galway the retired rugby player says: "Ireland has always played well on a European pitch and we’ve put in a lot of hard work over the years to stay ahead of the competition." We Belong couldn’t insult our intelligence any more. http://webelong.ie/

3. Generation Yes are being portryaed as the next generation with their future at stake. They are articulate Trinity College graduates with serious doors being opened for them and an endless stream of funding. Paraded around the media to make it seem like the younger voters are on board, Halligan has promoted its’ most ambitious into his bigger fronts [1]. A well funded website with multimedia section where they interview none other than Margot Wallstrom, "the parrot on the shoulder of Barossa". When we voted no last time she was first to ignore it, "what the people of Ireland really want is more Europe". http://www.generationyes.ie/

4. Women For Europe of all shapes and sizes, colours and races, smiling from ear to ear, appearing strong and independent, arms folded, hands on the hips. Excuse the fatsheep for sounding like a chauvenist but there are feminists all over the country that will fall for this ia an istant. So what has Europe done for the women of Ireland? Well, without the E.U we would still have our women in the kitchens and our dinners on the table. We never would have given them equal pay or maternity rights. And forget about equality in the workplace. Of them all, this is by far the most ridiculous of the yes campaigns. http://www.womenforeurope.com/

Each of these groups have offices they operate from. Right to privacy of donors means they won’t tell anyone who pays the lease. They’re all fairly savvy when it comes to dealing with the media. Goldhawk at The Phoenix commends them on knowing when to say what and how to say it but when all roads lead to Halligan, that comes as no surprise. 

The Institute for International and European Affairs is flaunting its pro Europeanism using our tax money. By enlisting Government departments as corporate members it has taken money from public coffers on a yearly basis since the early 1990’s. "Membership subscriptions" come at approx 6,000 Euro per annum per department. The IIEA recieved over 820,000 Euro in 2006 [2]. But by complying with the Standards in Public Office regulations and Electoral Acts there may be much larger sums that go unaccounted for.

Other interesting corporate members of the IIEA are The Irish Times, Independent News and Media Ireland and RTE. (see Bildeburger and Chips below) It should be elementary to us by now that the state broadcaster has the interests of the europhiles at heart. No surprise then that they want a debate slanted in favour of the yes vote [3]. They even host ads for the IIEA on rte.ie.

The establishment learned a lesson from the first Lisbon vote. They treated us with absolute contempt, hoping we would toe the line and vote yes to something they didn’t even explain to us. This time round they’re bombarding us with yes campaign propaganda. The fatsheep was in the cinema the other day and two ads came up asking "what has europe done for us?" it went on to explain the sweets and popcorn being eaten met European standards of quality. Nutritional information was given as per E.U. guidelines. The charm offensive is on. The E.U. is there for us. What should piss us off the most is that with Halligan channeling public money to fund his charm efforts, our own money is being used against us. 

 

1. http://www.thephoenix.ie/phoenix/subscriber/library/volume-27/issue-13/page-15.pdf
2. http://info-wars.org/?p=2988
3. http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/457

 

In April 2006, Willie Corduff, of the Rossport 5, travelled to Los Angeles to accept the coveted Goldman Environmental Prize, awarded to him for his efforts to protect his community from environmental and other threats it faces from the proposed Shell/ Statoil/ Marathon Consortium’s Corrib Gas project. Over the course of this essay, news articles have been analysed that are clearly written by those who are sympathetic to the cause of Royal Dutch Shell and their Corrib Gas Project. Indeed, Shell have been accused of lobbying the Irish Media as much as Irish Politicians in their attempt to acquire natural resources.

A quick look at their media campaign is required to understand the point of this essay. They have set about changing their tune since the PR disaster that martyred the Rossport 5. They have appointed John Egan as Director of Public Relations for Shell in Ireland – a former employee of both RTE and the BBC. Christy Loftus, External Affairs Advisor for Shell in Ireland is former president of the NUJ. Denise Horan, Senior Communications Advisor for the Corrib Gas Project is former editor of the Western People Newspaper. By employing prolific media-ites, they have successfully disseminated Shells version of events to the public. This essay will prove that fact.

There is one final point however. There was barely a mention in newspapers and other mainstream news in Ireland of the ongoing trouble between protesters and Shell Security. Violent scenes were ocurring daily but were not being reported. Protesters were beaten and numerous accounts of Garda brutality were unspoken of. Willie Corduff was beaten, strangled and then ridiculed by the media as being a nuissance. Kevin Myers, who in 2006, commented that Shell should hire tougher security to “bump these people off” has become the opinion of choice by radio DJ’s, and a journalistic heavyweight in Shells corner.

The Irish Times 23/4/09

ARMED GANG ATTACKS CORRIB SITE

The intention of the article was to damage the reputation of the Corrib Gas Project protesters. Given that the only source for the article was a spokesman for Gardaí who weren’t there, the source of this story was Shell Security. And a highly paid, professional securtiy firm apparently “ran for cover and effectively abandoned the site…”. An injured security guard is mentioned while failing to comment on the abuse reported by Willie Corduff at the hands of masked men working for Shell, that day before.

Crime Correspondent, Conor Lally, emphasis the escalation on behalf of the Shell To Sea protesters. There is no impartial acceptance of the small group of balaclava clad men being a minority in the movement to move Shell To Sea. In fact, quotes from the Gardaí are framed in such a way as to make it seem like all the protesters are violent, arms wielders not adhering to the law.

“This is a serious escalation, we’ve never had people wearing balaclavas and so on breaking into the site in a group with implements…” and was a “military-style operation”.

Quoting Chief Superintendant Tony McNamara: “People are absolutely entitled to protest but it should be peaceful and within the law,"

The subtle framing of the article dirties the reputation of the protesters as breaking the law and becoming armed and dangerous to the safety of the project. There is a reference to the “frightened local people”.

A stated reason for why there were no Gardaí present was the restriction imposed on overtime (this is brilliance in deceptive framing). The reader assumes the Garda response will be more overtime, and more of his/her taxes for the overtime. Now, not only are the protesters breaking the law, frightening local people and damaging economic projects in the country but to keep them calm will cost more taxes.

BBC News 23/4/09

SHELL SITE ATTACKED BY ARMED GANG

Previously, I have blown apart the BBC’s stated claim of impartiality in relation to Israel-Palestine. Opening with the armed gang of masked men detail, the immediate reference is to that of the injured security guard. No mention of injured protesters which we know there were. They say a protester placed himself under a truck rather than a prize winning peace activist staged a non-violent protest before being forcebally removed and allegedly beaten.

“On Wednesday, a protester placed himself under a truck at the entrance to the site where security fencing was being erected. The protest organisation Shell to Sea said that allegations protesters entered the site carrying weapons, or that any security personnel were harmed, were untrue. They say the only person injured was the protestor under the truck.”

“They say” frames legitimate allegations as being hear say and unfounded.

“Opponents claim the project threatens to destroy the environment of the coastline, and say Shell should fully refine the natural gas off-shore. However, Shell and other experts say this would be more difficult and dangerous and instead, it is building a refinery five miles inland.”

Shell and “other experts” is a reliable source for the BBC but of course that is what the corporation would say. “Other experts” could be a host of people working for Shell, “environmentalists” on the payroll of the company and any qualified person with vested interest in the project. They don’t explain who it is they’re sourcing. It is like asking a Fascist if Fascism is such a bad thing.

“The Irish government backs the project, which it says is essential for the country’s energy needs and has given generous tax concessions to petrochemical companies.”

Well, if the Government backs it, it must be a good thing. And they back it so much they give tax concessions to these companies. How nice of them. Who would dare contradict the will of the Government?

The article takes the Superintendents statement as the official story and that of the protesters as a “challenge”:

"However, Supt Larkin’s statement has been challenged by Shell to Sea and by Pobal Chill Chomáin spokesman John Monaghan. Mr Monaghan said the sequence of events was that, at about 11.30pm on Wednesday, a “handful” of local people were gathered outside the Glengad compound gate and had “unravelled” some fencing. None of these people was “armed”, he said. One man, Peter Lavelle, was inside and close to his brother-in-law, Mr Corduff. Mr Monaghan said that at about 3am yesterday a number of unidentified men in balaclavas arrived at the Glengad gate and entered the site. Mr Corduff, who was still under the truck, said he heard “noise” but did not know where it was coming from. At about 3.40am, Mr Corduff emerged from the truck to stretch his legs and was set upon by up to 11 men in balaclavas, beaten and held to the ground. A paramedic offered assistance and an ambulance was called."

Surprise, surprise, it’s the Republican Bogeymen. As the point of this essay becomes more clear, there is an element which, once understood, makes everything else make sense. Fox News openly admit if they cannot win the argument they will muddy the opponents argument so well, it is impossible for them to win. Bring in the Bogeyman Theory or guilt by association. Most people are rightly appalled when they hear the mention of modern Republicans. Bring the Republicans into the argument and generally the mere association with them is enough to discredit you and your cause. So, it is understandable then that the public relations officers with Shell would rather fight Republicans, than five imprisoned farmers.

A whole host of, at best, potential provos is ran through but listing off unnamed characters who are supposed to have done this or were “questioned” for that, does not amount to hard journalistic sourcing. Another elusive Garda source commented Republicans are using the incident as a recruiting ground but once again this is nothing but hear say.

The Indo finally mentions Willie Corduff but instantly discredits him by saying:

"Gardai disputed the claims by a local protest leader, Willie Corduff, that he was injured in a separate incident after he had been hiding under the trailer of a lorry at the plant.”

When in fact, the Rossport 5 man had been staging a peaceful protest under the truck and was forcibly removed and beaten in the process. The reference that he had been “hiding” does not do justice to a man who has been awarded by Peace Organisations worldwide for protesting non-violently.

How this article is framed is (1) Mention the Provo connection (2) Discredit Willie Corduff (3) Mention the jobs the operation will bring to the local communtiy (4) Once again remind the reader that it is the protesters who are breaking the law.

The inspiration for this article came from the TaraFoundation’s upload on YouTube. Please watch their video here:

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uF-NH_pvxMM

During the seventies, the National Director of the Blood Transfusion Service Board (BTSB) of Ireland was Jack O’Riordan. Travenol was seeking the license required to sell their Factor VIII in Ireland, and they courted the Department of Health. O’Riordan, for two years, 1973 and 1974, voiced his concerns to the Department regarding the dubious methods of collecting blood from people. He claimed the blood was being donated by "skid row types". Then he made a sudden u-turn:

• "His change of mind did, however, coincide with a letter to him from Travenol. The company was offering the BTSB a potentially lucrative deal: Travenol would allow the BTSB to become the sole supplier of Hemofil [factor viii], the BTSB would sell the product to hospitals at a mark-up and in addition receive a service fee amounting to 10 per cent of the price. O’Riordan and the BTSB leapt at the offer. There were no further memos or discussion about Travenol’s blood collection policy."[1]

The license was granted in 1974. By 1987, 105 Haemophiliacs had been infected with HIV.

The Company sponsored travel for O’Riordan and collected a University diploma in Britain on his behalf. The Lindsay tribunal uncovered a particularly close relationship between the company and O’Riordan. By 1978, the BTSB had sold its premises on Leeson street and moved into a larger site with a bigger lease. All the while, constantly complaining about being on the brink of insolvency. It never made tax returns or paid insurance for it’s workers. Ignoring entire bodies of research worldwide, it rubbished claims made against the risks of its’ products. As one journalist put it:

"It abandoned a research project which had the potential to dramatically reduce those risks in favour of a lucrative deal with a drugs company with a bad record. Through it all, the board managed to remain in "varying degrees of financial difficulty", ranging from the disastrous to the merely variable. Through it all, haemophiliacs paid with their lives".[2]

By 1982 it was bulk buying concentrate from four different companies. As well as Travenol, another one of the four was Armour Pharamceuticals based in Germany. Despite concerns raised by Armour about its’ own products, the BTSB had no reservations about the company and arranged to deal with them. Armour asked for indemnity from the BTSB, and so, were given protection from any legal proceedings that may arise in the future from infected Hemophiliacs. 

Seven months after infecting an Irish Hemophiliac with HIV, Armour recalled its’ Factor VIII from Britain and relinquished its’ licenses. Astonishingly, while they were retracting from the British market, they were in talks with the BTSB about a new supply and production deal. Armour would keep their name out of damning reports about outdated methods of heat treating the blood used for concentrates. The company claimed such reports would effect their credibiblity in their markets and would lead to unfair advantage for their competitors. What that means is because they were selling blood riddled with known and unknown diseases, the disclosure of that information to the public would harm their selling of such products!

It was clear to the BTSB, as was relayed at the tribunal, that it could make more profit by selling plasma and getting concentrate back, instead of making it itself. In 1985, the Department of Health wanted the BTSB to become self sufficient. But to finance the self suffiency program, the BTSB used the annual profit it made by its’ deal with Travenol. It never worked, and the Board continued its’ contracts with outside Pharmaceutical Companies.

Another example of how reckless the BTSB were, was played out in the "Anti-D" agent used in a small amount of complicated pregnancies. First manufactured by the BTSB in 1968, they outlined strict regulations on the screening of blood for contamination. In 1977, six women developed jaundice immediately after recieving the Anti-D during pregnancy. Hepatitis C would not be discovered for another twelve years and when it was, it was found that the women had been suffering from the then unknown disease.

The BTSB refused to aknowledge a potential connection between the women diagnosed with jaundice and the dodgy source of the agent. In 1991, staff at a hospital in England re-examined the blood from the same women. They told the BTSB that they suspected the women to have been infected with Hepatitis C from the Anti-D. The BTSB ignored the claims on the basis they were "not scientific enough" and continued to use the agent until 1994 when its’ own staff investigated the matter. 

According to evidence relayed at the Lindsay Tribunal, The BTS failed to contact hemophiliacs who had tested positive for HIV and dismissed charges that BTSB Blood products had caused HIV even though they knew it to be true. One witness testified that his 4 year old son son had been HIV positive for two years and only found out when another doctor commented that they seemed to be "coping well". The bemused family asked what it was they were coping so well with.

"I believe mistakes were knowingly made, and I want to see heads on a plate at the end of the tribunal," the witness said.

1. http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2000/09/10/story869359038.asp
2. http://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2000/sep/24/did-btsb-put-profit-before-safety/

PLEASE WATCH:

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnGANfT-0ak

In the nineteen seventies the miracle drug for haemophiliacs was Hemofil, the concentrated clotting agent also known as Factor VIII. The company who produced the wonder drug was Baxter-Travenol Healthcare Corporation, one of four major pharmaceuticals competing for the market to treat Haemophiliacs. In order to produce their Factor VIII and Factor IX clotting agents, copius amounts of plasma was required, sourced in the blood of other people. Quantity, as opposed to quality, was the driving force behind their collection of plasma.

• "…they moved to increase the yield from their 24 blood and plasma collection centres throughout the United States. Most of the centres were located in the poorer areas of towns and cities. None of the donors was an altruistic volunteer — all received payment for their blood… By the time Hemofil hit the market, the US was deep in recession. Unemployment was rife and the blood collection centres were magnets for the unemployed and the down and outs… Many of the donors were obvious alcoholics or drug addicts; one was filmed removing a bottle of spirits from underneath his jumper as he left the centre."[1]

Even though it had been established that the risk of hepatitis from non-voluntary [paid] donations was ten times higher then that from voluntary donations, Baxter-Travenol continued to collect blood by whatever means possible. It was not alone. All of the major pharmaceuticals were exploiting the non regulated blood trade. Arkansas Prison ran a program where, instead of working in the laundry or library, inmates, without screening, could donate blood for a few dollars a month. At a massive mark up the blood was sold to blood brokers who sold it at a further mark up elsewhere.

Nobody knows how much the blood trade is worth internationally. Without regulation or trade tariffs, it is in the hands of pharmaceuticals and their subsidiaries to buy and sell at prices they set. This has been the case for the last fifty years. The Philadelphia Inquirer has speculated that it is, by now, a billion dollar business. But to get there, it had to take whatever blood it could get.

A similar scandal to our own, played out in Britain, produced evidence to suggest that Continental Pharma Cryosan had supplied Travenol with blood in the 70’s and 80’s. This Canadian based Pharmaceutical Company have been proven to have extracted blood from cadavers/corpses and sold it on to other companies. 

• "Continental Pharma Cryosan had been caught importing blood from Russian cadavers and illegally re-labelling it as originating from voluntary donors in Sweden. The notorious company had also been discovered marketing blood sourced from Haitian slums.  Cryosan had also been found to have passed-on contaminated prison blood from the Arkansas penitentiary in the U.S.A. This prison blood, which should have been withdrawn in 1983 after the FDA determined that it was tainted, made its way to European companies [Belgian based Travenol] and to the Red Cross in Canada. Sadly, only around 15% of the contaminated prison blood was successfully recalled." [2]
• In an article in the Globe and Mail in 1975, Andre Picard described how Continental Pharma Cryosan Ltd. imported out-of-date products into Canada from the United States and then repackaged them for export to Europe.   Cryosan pleaded guilty to mislabelling and was fined in 1980 for importing blood that had been extracted from Russian cadavers and re-labelling the blood as having been sourced from Swedish donors.[3]

China is the largest supplier of blood to the trade nowadays. Slums have been filled with "professional" blood donors. As stories go, clinics would hold donors upside down as, decades ago, they believed they could get more blood this way.[4] This vampirical collection of blood has been happening throughout the world for decades. The Red Cross sells 60% of the blood it collects annually.[5] The fatsheep would love to say how much money these companies are making off selling blood, tainted or otherwise, but the truth is nobody knows. Like the arms trade and the rest of the black market, there is no control over the selling and buying of blood. Cheaper blood may be tainted but the price at which it comes means those who buy it can skim money, sell it on at a profit, or provide it to Hospitals who are desperate for the life saving liquid.

 

If you are unfortunate enough to have an accident and you require blood in the process of bringing your health back to stability, the price of the blood is over 100Euro per pack. Consider now, how that blood got to the hospital and how many blood brokers it was traded amongst before being sold to the hospital. Blood donors would recieve such blood for free. But is it because of the compassionate deed one has done in giving blood so that another may benefit in a time of need. Or do donors get free blood because they are supplying pints of profit for Pharmaceuticals.

 

1. http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2000/09/10/story869359038.asp
2. Alexander Cockburn & Jeffrey St. Clair, Editors, CounterPunch:  “Arkansas Bloodsuckers”
3. André Picard: “Canada Still Lacks Controls on plasma Trade, Inquiry Told,"  Globe and Mail, 27 February 1975 &  André Picard, “The Gift of Death” p. 48, 193 & 205.
4. http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=8943
5. http://www.bloodbook.com/part-4.html