Stardust Silver Swan objection

skywalker

MorningStar your last post really is obnoxious you know that, all you know about me or anyone else on here is a name on a message board. Dont presume to know any more.

lodgepole

MorningStar wrote:

I get people seeing it as fair enough way to go but that is the point it isn't a fair way to go or healthy for these people.

I agree with you.



I think a lot of the anger at the business itself stems from the fact that personal blame seems to be attributed to Mr. Butterly and he remains in control of the business to this day. I don't think any such protest would exist if it he weren't still involved.

Personally speaking I imagine a more healthy root for these people to take is to go directly to the Government, or to set up a group which actively seeks to find fire hazards in pubs/clubs around the country to highlight how frequently these problems arise. Venting anger towards one man and his, admittedly slightly tactless, approach to business doesn't achieve much except to prolong their own grief and cause him financial difficulty.

MorningStar

BadAcidStudios wrote:

Man, you asked a question and it has been answered many times. You asked why, here is the answer again, taken from IOL. Please read it carefully. I think you will find it answers your question and maybe will give you a bit more insight into why. Serioulsy though mate, the internet has wealth of information on the subject. Why not do a bit of research instead of coming across with total ignorance

Please read this carefully beofre posting again. It answers all your questions


A family bereaved by the Stardust disaster yesterday pledged to oppose the opening of a new bar on the site of the nightclub and to object to further planning applications.

Yesterday, on the 25th anniversary of the fire which claimed 48 lives, a planning application under the name of Patrick Butterly and Sons Limited, the owners of the Stardust nightclub, appeared in national newspapers. The application seeks permission for alternations to a car park on the eastern side of Butterly Business Park, close to the site on which the Stardust once stood.

Tonight, a new bar called the Silver Swan is expected to open on the Stardust site but families and friends of the Stardust victims have said they will protest outside the building.

OK now you think I am not listening yet miss what I am saying. First off the article is actually wrong is my first point. I am asking why now are they complaining and to an extent why not before.

So on the same day the bar applied to building changes and open? The Silver Swan is not a new bar or on the site of the club. As I said I heard the belief the bar was opening on the 14th was not true. Even this article suggests the 15th. I keep asking when did the Swan closed prior to the reopen and nobody has said. If the place wsa closed 10 years or a month is pretty important to the claims of a "new" bar opening. These people did not complain about the other things built close to the actual site.

The point about not wanting your opinion is I am asking for facts which should effect your views. Stating opinion again and again without actually know the situation is not the point of this thread. THere are other threads you can make allegation, claims and talk about the effects on families. THis thread is to discuss what the actual situation is with the pub. So far news reports have been untrue.

What is the actual planning permission for? Do you know? This is more to do with the thread than how people were treated unjustly.

This may be a ploy by people with political intentions it is certainly being spun a very particular way. You claim to be from the area were you old enough to remember the scumbags attacking people for working in the Stardust?

MorningStar

skywalker wrote:

MorningStar your last post really is obnoxious you know that, all you know about me or anyone else on here is a name on a message board. Dont presume to know any more.

Really did you grow up in the area?
Do you know any victims?
Does a pub reopening there effect you?
To tell me what happened in my area as a I grew up isn't obnoxious?

You persume (from what you said) that these people have the right becasue of grief yet don't seem to have any knowledge of the existing business there.

You don't like what I said leave as you said a few posts ago.

I think it sounds like you persumed things too so get off your high horse.

BadAcidStudios

Look, ive had enough

You say you want to know why they are protesting, i told you
You say you want facts but no facts are good enough

you ask me was i old enough to remember people being attacked. what has this got to do with your original question. what has this got to do with the debate we are even having.
The answer is though, no i wasnt old enough. I pass by the maxol everyday though and i see those people standing in the cold rain. they arent beating anyone up. All they ask people to do is beep their fecking horns and you have a problem with this. I tell you, everycar that passes beeps their horn, at least while im there. they are doing what they believe is right and i hope they get what they are looking for. Answers. they dont want butterly to be executed. All they want is answers and a bit of respect for the area which so many of their loved ones died. It pretty simple really but they still dont have it after 25years



"THis thread is to discuss what the actual situation is with the pub" eh no, you asked why they are "making such a big deal out of it". WE TOLD YOU

lodgepole

BadAcidStudios wrote:

You say you want to know why they are protesting,

Actually the OP wanted to know why they are protesting now when they haven't done so in the past (since the years following the disaster itself).

BadAcidStudios

eh, yes they have protested actually. this is just their next step. they have been battling for 25 years

"Actually the OP wanted to know why they are protesting now when they haven't done so in the past (since the years following the disaster itself)." i answered that question too by quoting one of the actual protesters. Jeez louise :-(

MorningStar

BadAcidStudios wrote:

Look, ive had enough

You say you want to know why they are protesting, i told you
You say you want facts but no facts are good enough

you ask me was i old enough to remember people being attacked. what has this got to do with your original question. what has this got to do with the debate we are even having.
The answer is though, no i wasnt old enough. I pass by the maxol everyday though and i see those people standing in the cold rain. they arent beating anyone up. All they ask people to do is beep their fecking horns and you have a problem with this. I tell you, everycar that passes beeps their horn, at least while im there. they are doing what they believe is right and i hope they get what they are looking for. Answers. they dont want butterly to be executed. All they want is answers and a bit of respect for the area which so many of their loved ones died. It pretty simple really but they still dont have it after 25years



"THis thread is to discuss what the actual situation is with the pub" eh no, you asked why they are "making such a big deal out of it". WE TOLD YOU

Let me clarify for you again. I am asking about the sudden objection to the pub after years of it being there. I have pointed out the article you posted is factually incorrect yet you choose to ignore it. You haven't answered the question and there are other questions too.

How long has the swan being closed?
How long was the pub on that seperate site closed after the fire?

If you don't know then you can stop posting your opinion of what appears to be the reason for a sudden objection. You claimed the pub would open on the 14th yet the article you posted says opposite. In fact as they are applying for a licence today they couldn't have openbed on the 14th as far as I aware but I will stand corrected.

The fact all you see is people walking around in the rain just means you don't know these people or the action of some. I have seen what people have done as a result of this grief. Do you judge thieves on the basis that they aren't stealing right now?

It appears to me that it is likely these people are doing this to hurt the owner financially and opportunists will push for political power on the back of this issue. Some parties particularly use an emotional matter to gain trust and intentionally feed misinformation to people. I remember the garge being built and there were no objections to that and as I said a night club opened in the same building and nobody was there campaigning before or after. You seem to choose to ignore this is not a new bar but an old one re-opening, I don't know how long it was closed for which is a big issue. It could have been a week of two or maybe 5 years, I don't know do you? I played pool in there as I was growing up and lots of people used the place without any problem what changed? Not why are the campaigning but why are they suddenly campaiging?

Heinrich

The OP is intransigent. "No surrender, I have my opioion which overrules yours".

Let him to it. Pity his pool hall which no longer exists or ...


...does it?

:mad:

MorningStar

BadAcidStudios wrote:

eh, yes they have protested actually. this is just their next step. they have been battling for 25 years

"Actually the OP wanted to know why they are protesting now when they haven't done so in the past (since the years following the disaster itself)." i answered that question too by quoting one of the actual protesters. Jeez louise :-(

Are you trying to tell me these people have been protesting about this pub for 25 year? Doing what? I never noticed and tas I said they didn't protest about all the other work around the site but maybe I missed this along with the 25 years they have been campaigning against the pub.
I think you are having trouble seperating the protests for enqires with that of the pub. If you are suggesting this is a political move to get there point accross rather than a justified complaint about the pub licence?
They are object to the licence and that is the subject of this threat the objection the campaigners have suddenly got after so many years.
Were you ever in the Swan?

BadAcidStudios

You claimed the pub would open on the 14th yet the article you posted says opposite.

please show me where I said it would open on the 14th

BadAcidStudios

Not why are the campaigning but why are they suddenly campaiging?

who said they are SUDDENLY CAMPAINING. Maybe outside the maxol but these people have been campaining for the last 25years. this is what you fail to understand.

WHY OUTSIDE THE MAXOL NOW, well as i have said, we have been through all that.

MorningStar

Heinrich wrote:

The OP is intransigent. "No surrender, I have my opioion which overrules yours".

Let him to it. Pity his pool hall which no longer exists or ...


...does it?

:mad:

I am looking for facts and have an opinion. If you have no facts and just opinion why post here. I am not surrendering for the facts I want and I will not choose to accept stories which I know are not true such as this is a new pub on the site of the stardust when it is not. My opinion overrules nobody I just won't accept lies and mistruths because it is a touchy subject. There is room for opinion outside what this thread is. Have facts then state them else leave

BadAcidStudios

Are you trying to tell me these people have been protesting about this pub for 25 year

You really havent read anything i have posted. They have been protesting for the TRUTH for the last 25years. About what actually really happened and whos to blame.

and again i ask?


please show me where I said it would open on the 14th

JimmySmith

I know MorningStar likes a good arguement, but he only asked a question and then got jumped on in this thread.

I can see where the OP is coming from, but can also see where the people against this are coming from. Everyone wants to take the side of the poor person who lost their family..

While this is a good thing, its not always right.
Greiving people do want revenge. Its perfectly natural. Just look at what happens when a suspect is arrested for a murder.
There are mobs out after them, even though they havent been convicted yet and may be innocent. Anyone in the mob would gladly kill this person, just because of to the emotional effects the crime had on them - they need a focus for their anger.

I believe Butterly is this person. While he may be guilty of murder or not, he is certainly the focus of this anger. I think this anger has clouded many of the families judgement here and now they are on autopilot because to them, someone has to pay.

Its a sad sad situation, and even draws out the emotions on message board. Those who are feeling for the families are automatically against someone who just looks at the cold logic of the situation.

Everyone, try to look from both sides of the coin here. Imagine you lost a loved one in that fire, how would you feel.
Also imagine you owned a building that got burned down and people got killed in it. It may have been accidental or arson etc, but you are now the focus of so many peoples anger.

The_Minister

BadAcidStudios wrote:

Taken from Indymedia ireland. it pretty much answers the question you asked.

The families and survivors of the stardust fire are continuing their picket of the Maxol filling station, which is owned by the Butterly family.
They are looking for justice for all those who were affected by the fire.

Times of pickets are:
Monday to Friday 6 – 8pm
Saturday 10am to 6pm
Sunday 12:30 to 6:00pm

They want the enquiry into the fire re opened, and a memorial on the site of the fire.

The Butterly family have had people out taking down registration numbers of cars, and they have claimed that they are losing 50% of their business.
.

That is harrassment

Heinrich

The proprietor would be deemed to be responsible for the DISASTER but possibly NOT THE FIRE because he abused the safety regulations. Fire doors were barred, chained or otherwise unusable as an escape route in the event of a fire. These are facts.

Those 48 deaths could have been avoided if the regulations were adhered to. The subsequent travesty of a tribunal did not answer questions in an imaprtial manner.

The proprietor was awarded damages on the basis of suspected arson. This would certainly be an explanation for the deep miscontent of the families and living victims!

BadAcidStudios

"It may have been accidental or arson etc, but you are now the focus of so many peoples anger."

Jimmy, i am looking at it from both sides of the arguement. iF the protestore were destroying property or hurting people then i would be against that. We are talking about the peacful protest at the Maxol garage, nothing else.

These people are asking for more questions to be asked and they just want a memorial site where the fire was. this is all they want. they dont want blood.

They ask people to beep their horn and show support. They are not the angry relatives you seem to suggest. Go down to them, there is nothing sinister or any anger there.

Also, even if it was arson or an accident. what people are angry about is the fact that fire doors were locked and other safety regulations ignored.

We cannot ignore these mistakes and brush them under the carpet just because justice hasnt been done in 25years

If a criminal is not caught, we do not forget about their crimes after a certain amount of time. The same applies here. I am not saying he is guilty or innocent. I just want the whole case to be reviewd with the new eveidence. this is all the families want. How can we deny them this AND HOW CAN WE BE AGAINST THEIR PEACEFUL PROTEST. They do not stop anyone going into the garage. they simply show their support

BadAcidStudios

That is harrassment

---

Please explain

MorningStar

BadAcidStudios wrote:

You claimed the pub would open on the 14th yet the article you posted says opposite.

please show me where I said it would open on the 14th

Ok I mixed you up with somebody else if didn' t. The point stands that is has been banded about and is not true and actual impossible.

BadAcidStudios wrote:

Not why are the campaigning but why are they suddenly campaiging?

who said they are SUDDENLY CAMPAINING. Maybe outside the maxol but these people have been campaining for the last 25years. this is what you fail to understand.

WHY OUTSIDE THE MAXOL NOW, well as i have said, we have been through all that.

You see you keep missing the point why are they suddenly campaigning about something that has been there along time? Your 4 point opinion of why was answered and I stated why that those reason have little substance. The article you posted states reasons that are fact such as it being a new pub on the site, opening on the 15th.
They SUDDENLY started CaMPAIGNING about the pub that is what this thread is about not about there campaign overall. If you want to talk about the whole thing go else where. You aren't listening read the start. I know they have been campaigning since the start, I never claimed anything to the contry.
THIS IS ABOUT THE OBJECTION TO THE PUB LICENCE BY THE CAMPAIGNERS ALL OF A SUDDEN AFTER OVER 20 YEARS of A BUSINESS BEING THERE
If you are suggesting it is just a way to make a fuss and get attention then say so. That is a reason that makes sense, it doesn't make it the right thing to do .

So to be absolutely clear this is about why they are suddenly after 20 years or more why they are complaining now! I think it is vegance and awarped view of justice through being close to a vigalanty

BadAcidStudios

Gooday to you sir

its a sad day when peaceful protestors are looked upon like this.

Be a real man, you say you live in Artane. We could argue all day but why not pop down to them and ask them yourself. You seem to see everything so black and white. Go down to them and ask them what the whole point of it is. Dont go onto a message board and START a post looking for answers that we cant give. I am not a protester but i can see why they are doing what they are doing.

peace and love brother. if its such a important topic, make the time and have a chat with them.

Also, they may not all share the exact same idea of what they hope to achieve. You keep on mentioning pub licenses. they merely want the truth, justice and a memorial, something quite normal and common dont you think. Im sure the most important thing for them is the truth and justice though. And yes, some may be against the idea of a new pub or whatever but i doubt thats why they are really there.

MorningStar

BadAcidStudios wrote:

Gooday to you sir

I was just about to ask the mods to get you off the thread for off topic discussion amazing how you failed to answer any questions and rant about a different matter

BadAcidStudios wrote:

Be a real man, you say you live in Artane. We could argue all day but why not pop down to them and ask them yourself.

Well I am not an idiot and as I said these people have been violent. Be a real man and look at facts and come to a logical conclusion instead of just allowing people do what they want when upset. Standing up for the correct moral thing in the face of difficult situation is manly to me. Revenge anf vegence are not good traits

BadAcidStudios

"these people have been violent"

thats a pretty big and stupid statement. do you know any of the people protesting. what a stupid and flippant comment to make. Not 1 bit of truth in it, or do you have evidence. Ask the workers at the maxol, it has been a completely peaceful protest. You cant just say things like that to suit your argument.

MorningStar

BadAcidStudios wrote:

"these people have been violent"

thats a pretty big and stupid statement. do you know any of the people protesting. what a stupid and flippant comment to make. Not 1 bit of truth in it, or do you have evidence. Ask the workers at the maxol, it has been a completely peaceful protest. You cant just say things like that to suit your argument.

Yes and I know this for a fact. You don't know what I have seen. An why I always carry evidence of people who I have seen attack people. You also don't know what me and my family did to help during the fire. You seem to be too young to remeber the events around the fire. THe butterly's had death threats made and attempts.

Stay on topic or leave you are adding nothing there are other places for you to go if you have nothing to add here.

BadAcidStudios

YOU STAY ON TOPIC

we are talking about the peaceful protests at the maxol. You cannot be sure that anyone there has ever been violent or made threats to anyone. That is pretty big generalising. Please remember what we are talking about. You cant just say Sh*t like that

HelterSkelter

Are you going to go down and ask the protestors your questions MorningStar?

MorningStar

BadAcidStudios wrote:

YOU STAY ON TOPIC

we are talking about the peaceful protests at the maxol. You cannot be sure that anyone there has ever been violent or made threats to anyone. That is pretty big generalising. Please remember what we are talking about. You cant just say Sh*t like that

I saw people in this peace who I saw attack people. You don't have to beleive me but peoples' windows didn't smash themselves and Butterly didn't get security for no good reason.

The topic is as I stated it as I created this thread you are off topic and will not stay on topic.

MorningStar

The questions remain
How long was the Swan closed for prior to being re-opened?
How long was it closed directly after the fire?
Why suddenly complain about this pub?
Why not complain about all the other building by the site?

On the issue of planning this is what was planned

"I Clive Jackson (Unique Group) seek planning permission is for change of use including alterations to external front and side facade and ancillary works from an existing warehouse to a Childrens Play Facility (recreation and education) with ancillary cafe. The application also covers the construction of a mezzanine floor level for party rooms measuring 230 sq.m. onto the existing warehouse which measures 1060sq.m. to give an overall area of 1290sq.m. designated car parking has been provided on site for the facility at Unit 31 Butterly Business Centre, Kilmore Road, Artane, Dublin 5." Applied in March? nothing else there for Butterly Business park Kilmore Road
And it was not applied for on the 25th aniversary. I am not sure if it was in the paper as claimed by some. The person putting the ad in would be responsible for this.

THe pub is not on the site of the stardust

All else is off topic.

Heinrich

MorningStar wrote:

I saw people in this peace who I saw attack people. You don't have to beleive me but peoples' windows didn't smash themselves and Butterly didn't get security for no good reason.

The topic is as I stated it as I created this thread you are off topic and will not stay on topic.

I assume that you mean:

"I saw people at this peaceful protest attacking people"

How can you prove this apart from pontificating?

This sort of unsubstiantiated comment is also off topic.

snickerpuss

You're saying that the people who i see protesting with signs etc outside maxol have been smashing peoples windows?
I find that somewhat hard to believe.