**ALL THINGS IRISH WATER/WATER RELATED** Part 2 - MOD WARNING IN OP

Tinkersbell

I do not want to pay for water in any way

papu wrote: »

It's also a choice to have the water services pump the sh*te out of your house , treat it and pump clean treated water back in.

I have my own treatment plant.
Do you?

darkpagandeath

papu wrote: »

It's also a choice to have the water services pump the sh*te out of your house , treat it and pump clean treated water back in.

Who pays for the septic tanks to be cleaned ?

papu

I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Who pays for the septic tanks to be cleaned ?

Who should pay ?

Tinkersbell

I do not want to pay for water in any way

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Who pays for the septic tanks to be cleaned ?

Or the annual service charge?

Tinkersbell

I do not want to pay for water in any way

papu wrote: »

Who should pay ?

Well, if you're on public mains, I'm paying for you even though I pay for my own separately.

Phoebas

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So with all the people about with mobile phones only 2 new's papers got shots of the brick man ? Nothing odd about that at all ?

Two separate rival news organisations are reporting the 'brick man'. One has published a photograph. The other has published a video. There is no doubt that the incident happened.

I really don't get this compulsion to deny or downplay bad behaviour on one side or other of this issue. You don't have to defend every action of people on your 'side' of the argument in order to defend the argument.

FREETV

I do not want to pay for water in any way

geeksauce wrote: »

Just watched a video on the Irish times site showing people banging on the car with their placards and a man in a grey jumper being dragged away from the guards by his wife as he was attacking them. Then there was a few objects flying through the air at the car.

Anyone debating to go to the protest on the 10th will be discouraged by this sort of behaviour doing themselves no favours at all.

There is a major protest on December 6 also.

Banjo String

I do not want to pay for water in any way

Phoebas wrote: »

Two separate rival news organisations are reporting the 'brick man'. One has published a photograph. The other has published a video. There is no doubt that the incident happened.

I really don't get this compulsion to deny or downplay bad behaviour on one side or other of this issue. You don't have to defend every action of people on your 'side' of the argument in order to defend the argument.

Whats your view on the homeowner in Dundalk having his 'gonads' power washed phoebe?

papu

I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth

Tinkersbell wrote: »

Well, if you're on public mains, I'm paying for you even though I pay for my own separately.

Yup , I don't pay tax , I don't own a car. I pay very little/ nothing for water. You're cool with continuing to pay for me?

darkpagandeath

Phoebas wrote: »

Two separate rival news organisations are reporting the 'brick man'. One has published a photograph. The other has published a video. There is no doubt that the incident happened.

I really don't get this compulsion to deny or downplay bad behaviour on one side or other of this issue. You don't have to defend every action of people on your 'side' of the argument in order to defend the argument.

Eh ? I'm not a protestor who am I defending exactly ? I am not completely blinkered on one side. I just find it highly odd that this person.

A) Had a brick and got that close to throw it.
Did it in plain sight of over what ? 100 odd Garda
C) Got away scot free.

Phoebas

Banjo String wrote: »

Whats your view on the homeowner in Dundalk having his 'gonads' power washed phoebe?

It looked well out of order. The Sierra worker who did that should be investigated by his company, and if the homeowner complains, by the Gardai.

Phoebas

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Eh ? I'm not a protestor who am I defending exactly ? I am not completely blinkered on one side. I just find it highly odd that this person.

A) Had a brick and got that close to throw it.
Did it in plain sight of over what ? 100 odd Garda
C) Got away scot free.

And yet all the evidence suggests that that's exactly what happened.
Occam's razor.

Tinkersbell

I do not want to pay for water in any way

papu wrote: »

Yup , I don't pay tax , I don't own a car. I pay very little/ nothing for water. You're cool with continuing to pay for me?

I believe that a decent state should provide water for it's citizens as a basic right,
be they billionaires or on the dole, through the general tax intake of that state.

Banjo String

I do not want to pay for water in any way

Phoebas wrote: »

It looked well out of order. The Sierra worker who did that should be investigated by his company, and if the homeowner complains, by the Gardai.

Ok, fair enough phoebas.

Likewise, brick throwers, etc aren't exactly needed during peaceful protests.

Does nothing but damage the objective.

firemansam4

There has to be some boardies on here who would have a very good understanding of photo shoped images? I would like to know there thoughts on this brick picture.

Phoebas

Banjo String wrote: »

Likewise, brick throwers, etc aren't exactly needed during peaceful protests.

And neither are people who impede the lawful movement of meters installers - or government Ministers.

Phoebas

firemansam4 wrote: »

There has to be some boardies on here who would have a very good understanding of photo shoped images? I would like to know there thoughts on this brick picture.

What about the brick video?

Banjo String

I do not want to pay for water in any way

Phoebas wrote: »

And neither are people who impede the lawful movement of meters installers - or government Ministers.

This govt haven't had a mandate since 2012 tbh.


Fcuk em.

Smidge

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I'll try and put it as simple as possible for you. Wilful obstruction is not committed if you have a lawful reason for being there. It specifically states this in the legislation. The Irish Workers had a lawful right to install the meters. The protesters do not have a lawful reason to trap someone in their car. Which part of that is not clear to you?

Going to have to pin you down to an answer on this.
Please provide a link for this claim.

The IW workers were committing trespass as they and their property were clearly on that mans property. Under law, they were committing trespass as the law states that "trespass to land is to enter someone else's private property without the owners permission"
They may have a lawful right to install meters.
They broke the law when they trespassed on that man's property and actually under the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, 1997, that man was within his rights to eject them using reasonable means(which he did, he didn't use a baseball bat or gun etc)
Although he may have gotten away with stronger force as he could have claimed any of the below under that particular act.

18.—(1) The use of force by a person for any of the following purposes, if only such as is reasonable in the circumstances as he or she believes them to be, does not constitute an offence—

(a) to protect himself or herself or a member of the family of that person or another from injury, assault or detention caused by a criminal act; or

(b) to protect himself or herself or (with the authority of that other) another from trespass to the person; or

(c) to protect his or her property from appropriation, destruction or damage caused by a criminal act or from trespass or infringement; or

(d) to protect property belonging to another from appropriation, destruction or damage caused by a criminal act or (with the authority of that other) from trespass or infringement; or

(e) to prevent crime or a breach of the peace.

Also, have no idea why you keep throwing civil tort at this. It has no pull in this instance and also being wrongly cited by you to allow some justification to what the IW workers did.

papu

I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth

Tinkersbell wrote: »

I believe that a decent state should provide water for it's citizens as a basic right,
be they billionaires or on the dole, through the general tax intake of that state.

I'm not on the dole , plenty of expendable income , I use water and don't pay for it .
Fair?

Phoebas

Banjo String wrote: »

This govt haven't had a mandate since 2012 tbh.


Fcuk em.

Democracy. Inconvenient, isn't it?

Banjo String

I do not want to pay for water in any way

Phoebas wrote: »

Democracy. Inconvenient, isn't it?

For FG?

Absolutely.

Rubber_Soul

I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth

Phoebas wrote: »

Are we to believe that the two newspapers are colluding to produce a fake video and a fake photograph both depicting the same event?

In fairness the photo did look like it could have been edited, but there's an incredible amount of confirmation bias going on around here.

I really thought it was obvious that I was joking. Poe's law I guess.

rocoso

whilst we are opposed to water charges this is what some county council staffr are at in mayo

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/us-politician-visited-mayo-a-month-before-car-park-controversy-30495800.html

Tinkersbell

I do not want to pay for water in any way

papu wrote: »

I'm not on the dole , plenty of expendable income , I use water and don't pay for it .
Fair?

We all pay for it already, so yes, fair.

What FG are now proposing is a home with 10 adults will pay the same as a home with 2 adults.
Fair?

Smidge

tayto lover wrote: »

If the law backs up trespass, obstruction and assault, just because it is used on the side of the Govt, then it is clearly an ass and is being used not to govern the people but to oppress them and deserves to be broken.

As someone who is a peaceful man I would be obliged to take the message of Martin Luther King -

"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so."

Ah nah you ditdn't!!!!!
*finger snap and head roll*

I posted that MLK quote earlier in the thread an it was ridiculed by the masses

Doesn't lesson its value, just makes them seem idiotic

Phoebas

StarshipPooper wrote: »

I really thought it was obvious that I was joking. Poe's law I guess.

Fair enough. Its sometimes hard to separate parody from reality around here.:o

firemansam4

Phoebas wrote:

What about the brick video?

Maybe that was photoshoped as well? only joking in case anyone takes me seriously. I haven't seen the video, will have to take a look at it.

Smidge

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Joan is free. But it's the Indo so might not be true.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/tanaiste-joan-burton-leaves-jobstown-slowly-following-protesters-blockade-30747321.html

Form an orderly queue lads

donvito99

I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth

darkpagandeath wrote: »

C) Got away scot free.

He was arrested by all accounts. Have you actually watched the fúcking video?