Read 'em and weep: Yet Another First Communion Photo found!

Statement by Our Dear Leader, Mr Bertie Ahern, An Taoiseach Supreme, 13th May, 2007.

Mr Gilmartin's allegations are false

The two allegations made by Tom Gilmartin are false and malicious. These allegations are that I received £50,000 in 1989 and £30,000 in 1992 or later from Mr Owen O'Callaghan. It is these allegations (not my financial affairs) which are being investigated by the Mahon Tribunal. A brief examination of Mr Gilmartin's allegations will demonstrate that they simply do not stand up. After almost nine years of investigations there is no evidence of me receiving any money from Mr. O'Callaghan and there is no evidence of me doing any favour for Mr. O'Callaghan. The allegations made by Mr. Gilmartin are hearsay. He has no personal knowledge of any facts which could support such an allegation. I simply did not receive any money from Mr O'Callaghan nor did I do any favours for him. The allegations are baseless. They are not credible. They are borne out of spite and malice. To demonstrate this to the public, I will now refer to the history and changing nature of these allegations. Before so doing I want to note that between February 1998 and December 2002 Mr Gilmartin had 58 separate communications with the Mahon Tribunal. The timing of the making of the two allegations against me is of some importance, as is the changing content of the allegations.

(i) The £30,000 allegation

* Mr Gilmartin first referred to me receiving money from Mr O'Callaghan in his sixth communication with the Tribunal, in May 1998, but didn't mention the sum allegedly paid until his 16th communication, in October 1998, 5 months after first raising the issue.

* This 16th communication in October 1998 contained the allegation that I received £30,000 from Mr.

* O'Callaghan in return for blocking tax designation which had been applied for by one of Mr O'Callaghan's rivals.

* Mr Gilmartin's allegation followed questions which he had been asked about the destination of a £30,000 transaction in the accounts of a company, Barkhill, in which Mr Gilmartin and Mr O'Callaghan were involved. The transaction was in June 1992.

* Mr Gilmartin's allegation conveniently explained an otherwise odd transaction.

(ii) The £50,000 allegation

* It was not until communication no. 34 in November 1999 that Mr Gilmartin first alleged that I got an additional £50,000 from Mr O'Callaghan in 1989. Mr Gilmartin said that he had been told this by an unnamed former business partner of Mr O'Callaghan.

* In communication no. 41 in May 2001 Mr Gilmartin changed this allegation. He now said: "I also recall \[Mr O'Callaghan] telling me … that he had given £50,000 to Bertie Ahern in 1989".

* In communication no. 43 in September 2002 Mr Gilmartin alleged that I received a large sum of cash from Mr O'Callaghan after a football match in 1990.

* This changing and unreliable story is essentially the same as the story which was written by Mr Frank Connolly in 2000 and which was proved to be a lie in the Circuit Court. The £50,000 payment was allegedly made in 1989 - 5/6 years before the transactions now under inquiry. The £30,000 payment was first alleged to have been made in 1992 - 2 to 3 years before the payments in my accounts now being looked at by the Mahon Tribunal. I received no such money at any time.

It is as a result of these allegations that I am now the subject of inquiry by the Mahon Tribunal.

Our Dear Leader . . . .

The most interesting thing, to me at least, about the Bartholomew-gate affair, is the apparent reluctance/inability of the opposition to make any sort of political capital from the whole sordid sequence of events.

Over at Irish Election, blogger Cian seems to feel it's all down to a little timidity on the part of Rabbitte and Co. due to the unexpected bounce in the polls St Bartie received after the initial revelations late last year.

Bertie has a long history as a likeable character, a good guy and a solid worker, he is ‘anorak man’, after all. He was the saviour of Fianna Fail when it looked like tearing itself apart and he has run the place for ten years and we have had good times. The public feel they know him, he is one of us. So divorcing people from their (seemingly innate) drive to like him is the challenge facing the opposition. That was even before the news of payments, irregularities, rented/bought houses and tribunal allegations broke. Now they are even worse off.


The current wisdom is that since October, Enda Kenny and Pat Rabbitte are wary of attempting to attack the Taoiseach on his finances and the allegations in the media. They reckon that it was the seeming persecution of Bertie back in October that stunted their growing popularity and moved them back to square one in terms of poll support and momentum. Since Sunday, when the election was called, they appear to have some of that momentum recovered but it took them nearly four/five months to do.

On the face of it the reasoning appears sound, yet I can't help feeling that their apparent timidity might stem a reluctance to being caught casting the first stone. Discussing this with a friend the other day he posited that it might be a case of 'You show me yours and I'll show you mine', i.e. that they were all in their way corrupt to some degree and that no-one wanted to be seen leading the charge against the Drumcondra-born Saint, for fear of their own affairs being examined a tad too closely under the media-microscope. I decided to correct him and said "If that were the case then it would be more 'You don't tell anyone what size mine is, and I won't tell anyone what size yours is.'"

Upon reflection Cian's reasoning appears to be the soundest, as it would be entirely typical of the main opposition figures (Kenny especially) to let such a golden opportunity slip from their grasp due to their seeming panic at the thought of actually doing or saying anything even remotely controversial, in case it might lose them a vote or two. The fact that it might inspire some of the more apathetic of the potential electorate to decide they were worthy of a vote seems not to have figured too highly in their thinking on this subject.

Which, again, is entirely typical of these sad-clowns we have the misfortune to find ourselves saddled with.


I was astounded last year when our dear Leader managed to fob-off legitimate concerns regarding his ethics, while acting as Finance Minister, with some guff about Holy Communion money. What was required at the time was one of the opposition figures to stand up and excoriate him for trivialising such a serious issue but that would of required actual ownership as well as current possession of a few anatomical items which this opposition appears to be sorely lacking, namely: some backbone and a pair of balls. Possession of even one ball each would suffice.

More Old First Communion photos found!

Next is a photo of a lovely young girl just after recieving her first communion money, probably from a very nice older gentleman from which her family is renting a house, possibly in Drumcondra, though as the photo is not dated and contains no descerniable identifying remarks we can merely surmise the sequence of events that transpired immediately prior to the taking of this lovely photo of this lovely young girly.

Another wonderful example of idyllic uncorrupt paradise that was Ireland of the late-1950's/early-1960's.

Fianna Fail Election Posters

So, I saw the above image at The web-site of the Sons of Destiny and, well, I couldn't resist, it was to easy a shot, yer Honour.

Ahern denies need to answer questions

The Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, has denied that he has questions to answer in relation to a report in today's Irish Times that he received money from businessmen
....[snippity snip].....
He told journalists that it was 'none of their business' if he got something from somebody as a present.

He said today's allegation that he had received payments of between €50,000 and €100,000 was 'off the wall' and 'an unfair, unjust leak'......

Mr Ahern added that he was not answering what he got for his Holy Communion money, his confirmation money, or his birthday.

(See also: Has Bertie been a bold boy?)


Now as far as I can tell no-one asked him anything related to Holy Communion money, his confirmation money, or his birthday, but the bould Bertie-boy didn't let that stop him spewing out a load of hyper-bolical inanity.


So I couldn't help thinking of his little tantrum when I saw the pic of him laughing with [at?] the voters. So I did this....





and this....






and this....







and this....







* and this....





If anyone out there has any better suggestions, leave a comment or email me at the address below.


*NB:The original image, from whence I doctored last 3 examples, were downloaded from some other Irish blog which I am in the process of trying to re-locate (never bookmarked it!) - so if anyone out there reading this knows who did the original please drop me a line at