Bertie’s new life as God

Bertie Ahern, worshipped as a two faced baby


Bertie the bringer of confusion

It is not correct — if I said so I wasn’t correct. I can’t recall if I did say it. But I did not say, or if I did say it, I didn’t mean to say it, that these issues could not be dealt with until the end of the Mahon Tribunal
Bertie Ahern, Taoiseach of Ireland, to the Dail, 30th January 2008.

Bertie delivered this gem of mangled syntax and distorted English to the quizzical and down-right baffled Dail yesterday. He is the master of bafflement, the bringer of confusion, the word-mangling supreme being. Bertie the word-mangler makes ancient greek look lucid and logical.

Philosophers like Sartre and Kant were famously prolix and contorted. At least Kant made sense once he could be understood – Sartre rarely did, but at least he didn’t subject a whole nation to his ponderous musings. And they both were tackling the great issues of metaphysics, meaning, and epistemology. Bertie has no such excuse. He is dealing with questions that demand yes/no answers. And we get this verbiage. Why?

The depths of muddle revealed by his multi-layered miasma of contorted speech are his greatest defence and his biggest political asset. He hides the truth while dressing up reality in a many-layered and concealing cloak of mystery.

The truth is simple. He’s hiding something. He cannot think straight because he has twisted and turned from reality so often that he breaks out in a sweat everytime he has to answer a question about it.

The facts are simple: he is not tax-compliant for a period dating back to the mid-1990s when he was Minister for Finance. That the highest official in the land responsible for the collection of taxes cannot satisfy the tax authorities that he paid his tax, from a period dating back more than ten years, means that he either didn’t pay the right tax, or his accounts were not in order. If he had any honor left in him, he’d resign. He’d put the country before his personal ambition and he’d hand over to someone more capable of running the country. With economic uncertainty, a collapsing property market, and a potential US recession around the corner, the country needs stability and focus. Not this crap.

Is 2877290 a happy number?

A happy number is any positive integer where if you progressively add the square of its digits and produce new numbers, and then repeat, you get 1. Other numbers are unhappy.  Let’s try it for 2877290:

For 2877290, the sum of the digits squared is:
4 + 64 + 49 + 49 + 4 + 81 = 251 (thanks for Katrina for pointing out my maths mistake!!!)
Repeat for 251: 4 + 25 + 1 = 30
Repeating for 30 gives: 9 + 0 = 9
And so on, until it gets into an endless cycle. Therefore, 2877290 is not a happy number!!

You may think me completely insane, but it is true. Look it up.

The Mahon Tribunal will not be finished until it has thoroughly uncovered the full mathematical truth behind the deposit of £28,772.90 into Celia’s account. It is certainly an unhappy number for Bertie.

Smoke and mirrors

Here’s a simple test. Guess what the following sentence means. Pause afterwards before continuing to read the post. Think about what it means for you and ask yourself, is it clear?

I did not see him steal your money.

What does that mean? Simple sentence, small words, straight forward, huh?

Now, look at this list:

  1. I did not see him steal your money.
  2. I did not see him steal your money.
  3. I did not see him steal your money.
  4. I did not see him steal your money.
  5. I did not see him steal your money.
  6. I did not see him steal your money.
  7. I did not see him steal your money.

Same sentence, but depending on the emphasis, the meaning changes. The sentence could potentially mean seven different things:

  1. Maybe someone else saw it, but I didn’t.
  2. I want to emphasise, very firmly, that I did not see it happen.
  3. I didn’t actually see it, but I know it to be true. Maybe I heard it, or sensed it some other way.
  4. I saw someone else steal your money, just not him.
  5. Maybe he was borrowing it only. He took it in full view and didn’t seem to be taking it secretly…
  6. I saw him take some money, but maybe it wasn’t your money, but someone elses.
  7. I definitely saw him steal something from you, but it might not have been your money, but something else.

You see, words written on pages have many meanings. The difficulty for the author is to transmit the one meaning they meant and not one of the stray meanings. Throw in sarcasm, irony, rudeness, prejudice, grammar, spelling, and all the rest of it, and all hell breaks loose.

Now, if I was a politician, say, then I’d learn the art of expressing myself suitably ambiguously, just like above, to throw up multiple interpretations. (The deliberate opposite of an author trying hard to be clear). I’d let the audience try and interpret the meaning for themselves, relying on my popularity to save the day. Hey presto! I can say one thing, but have multiple meanings embedded in them.

I was going to write about this in more detail, but Gavin’s blog got to it before me:


The sum of £28,772.90 is a curious figure, projected into fame now for its infamous role in Bertie Ahern’s finances. But Google the number “2877290 Ireland” and you get this curious pdf: Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety Competent National Authorities

“Competent”? In Ireland? This raised my suspicions immediately. As also did the word “biosafety”, cleverly disguising its true intent: “boyo safety”. Bertie, being the biggest boyo of them all, should surely be connected to this, eh?

The magic number occurs for the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources of Sri Lanka:
+94 11 2877290

  1. 94 obviously refers to the year, 1994, that Celia lodged the money…
  2. 11 is a dark reference to 9/11, perhaps indicating some knowledge of that terrible event.
  3. The 2877290 is the amount, in cents, of the transaction.

Searching the same document for “Ireland”, further clues are revealed. The Irish Environmental Protection Agency is mentioned, alongside its regulatory functions. The full list is clearly intended to refer to the movement and distribution of large sums of money:
• Handling, transport, packaging and identification
• Intentional introduction into the environment (AIA)
• Transboundary movement (import/export)
• Contained use

Now if Bertie was not involved in the handling, transport, packaging (briefcasing), and identification of large wads of cash then I’m a monkey’s uncle. Let’s not even mention transboundary movement and contained use.

Now, even more damning proof: the “Environmental Protection Agency” is an anagram for “Money never prolong ancient attic”. Hmmm. This is clear and direct evidence that Bertie’s attic conversion was not prolonged by the absence of money.

I am forwarding these findings immediately to the Mahon Tribunal as a matter requiring urgent attention, along with signed release warrants from the authorities of Dundrum Mental Hospital showing me to be fully recovered from my recent nervous incidents…

The Taoiseach, the mistress, and the businessman

Does anybody actually understand what this Mahon tribunal is all about? I don’t mean the purpose or the terms of reference particularly – although they are bewildering enough. I mean – why is it doing things the way it is, and why is this the best way to get at the nub of the issue? Why are we being driven insane by this patently absurd, bizarre tribunal?

The actual details emerging are bewildering and I presume that I am not alone in thinking that: the multiple hard briefcases that Celia didn’t look into; taking money to a bank without counting it first; was it sterling or dollars?; landlords giving preposterously large amounts of money to their tenants for renovations to houses; no receipts given or received; no reaction to having £30,000 plonked onto a desk unasked for; a Minister of Finance not having a bank account and preferring cash; carrying huge wads of cash around and either leaving it in a wardrobe in a hotel for the night, or having it counted by bank officials in a different room; and endless details piled on endless details about who drove who where and money being taken out of accounts and moved to other accounts, seemingly without rhyme or reason. Stringing this all together into a coherent narrative is impossible. Enda Kenny has called it a “fantasy-land situation”. Unless…

The Taoiseach today opened his two days of evidence by explicity saying he never took bribes in his life. Has the tribunal accused him of taking a bribe? No. So why is he protesting his innocence then? Bizarre. Unless…

It all seems like a vast farrago of nonsense to me. Unless…it is a bunch of half-assed, barely credible LIES. That is the only sane conclusion.

So my point is this: why are we listening to this bunch of incredibly transparent lies? I mean, given that Celia Larkin can herself give three different (and contradictory) accounts of those events, and that even her latest account differs from Michael Wall’s account the previous day, and that it all makes as much sense as a mountain of bullshit, who cares anymore to listen to it? Why persist with the LIES? Why??

I want Judge Mahon to just call a halt. Just stand up and say “NO MORE LIES!”. He should close it down. Enough is enough. Those who think Bertie is a lying, cheating, venal, shallow-minded, petty, vision-less nonentity don’t need any more convincing. Those who think the sun shines out of his arse won’t have their minds changed either. Those who don’t care either way, don’t care any more. Celia, Bertie, and Mr. Wall don’t need it.

So what the fuck is it for?