Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Gemma not taking enforced retirement too well

Options
1…120121123125126…333

Comments

  • Options
    #3662
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,484 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    ollkiller wrote: »
    Could this thread go back to being about Gemma. Thanks.

    Shes not protesting anymore. There were 5 people outside Google the other day. 1 of them was the guy in the Halloween costume.

    She just retweets stuff now.

    Village editorial here from the weekend. They double down on calling her a racist.

    https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2019/08/village-editorial-september-gemma-odoherty-2019/

    You forget some of the lunacy. In mid-August she tweeted: “Wondering why the skies over Ireland look so artificial? The psychopathic elite are blocking the sun from us and poisoning the air above us with chemicals. This is genocide”.

    lol!


  • Options
    #3663
    TaurenDruid
    Registered Users Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    ollkiller wrote: »
    Could this thread go back to being about Gemma. Thanks.

    So - Gemma, then.

    https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165741246033387520

    LED lights are "deadly"?! Who knew?!

    Also, retweeting about censorship by Google of the word "covfefe"...

    She's not too happy with the Village Magazine editorial about her, either...


  • Options
    #3664
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,164 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    TaurenDruid wrote: »
    So - Gemma, then.

    https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165741246033387520

    LED lights are "deadly"?! Who knew?!

    Also, retweeting about censorship by Google of the word "covfefe"...

    She's not too happy with the Village Magazine editorial about her, either...

    Deadly? they're bleedin' brilliant.


  • Options
    #3665
    hetuzozaho
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭hetuzozaho


    Just looking through her tweets there

    https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165904009166761985?s=20

    I seen TDS used on this Forum by a poster yesterday and didn't know what it was. You learn something new everyday ha!


  • Options
    #3666
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Kimsang wrote: »
    What you sent me certainly crossed the line of decency and I'm happy to see the person punished- comments like that add nothing to the discussion.

    I'm curious, would you say this has crossed the line of decency?
    Numerous people have called Stephen a racist. I think it is equally as disgusting as what you sent me.



    When in fact he didn't admit he was a racist. He said it tongue-in-cheek to challenge the definition of racist.

    Try using the search functions on the site.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3667
    francois
    Registered Users Posts: 3,382 ✭✭✭francois


    The Nal wrote: »
    Shes not protesting anymore. There were 5 people outside Google the other day. 1 of them was the guy in the Halloween costume.

    She just retweets stuff now.

    Village editorial here from the weekend. They double down on calling her a racist.

    https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2019/08/village-editorial-september-gemma-odoherty-2019/

    You forget some of the lunacy. In mid-August she tweeted: “Wondering why the skies over Ireland look so artificial? The psychopathic elite are blocking the sun from us and poisoning the air above us with chemicals. This is genocide”.

    lol!

    Good to see the Village not holding back, though no doubt she'll threaten (again) to sue


  • Options
    #3668
    Lackadaisical
    Closed Accounts Posts: 518 ✭✭✭Lackadaisical


    If she's so concerned about 5G and LEDs she might want to stop using mobile devices entirely. I find the hypocrisy quite amusing - ranting about what are basically the two technologies (LEDs making up every mobile display and also portable lighting) and LTE+ mobile signals that are the very tools that enable her.

    Maybe she might heed her own advice and go back to typewriters and candles?


  • Options
    #3669
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,723 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Struggling to understand how LEDs/LCDs etc are harmful in the slightest.


  • Options
    #3670
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Overheal wrote: »
    Struggling to understand how LEDs/LCDs etc are harmful in the slightest.

    Gemmas smart dust guy could teach you?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #3671
    Ha Long Bay
    Registered Users Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭Ha Long Bay


    francois wrote: »
    Good to see the Village not holding back, though no doubt she'll threaten (again) to sue

    It didn't take long.

    https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165967010943123456?s=20


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3672
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,408 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    john4321 wrote: »
    It didn't take long.

    https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165967010943123456?s=20

    Loved this line

    "This is possibly the most egregious defamation in the history of the state. "


    She really does have a high opinion of herself.


  • Options
    #3673
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    john4321 wrote: »
    It didn't take long.

    https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165967010943123456?s=20

    You would imagine that she would know how long it takes for a case to get to court.


  • Options
    #3674
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,484 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Thats a very obvious bait by the Village lads. Shes really worked herself into a corner. If she ever did end up in court the info she would have to reveal and that would be open to investigation would destroy her.


  • Options
    #3675
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,723 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The Nal wrote: »
    Thats a very obvious bait by the Village lads. Shes really worked herself into a corner. If she ever did end up in court the info she would have to reveal and that would be open to investigation would destroy her.

    What’s the quote they made


  • Options
    #3676
    ArmaniJeanss
    Registered Users Posts: 13,299 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    The Nal wrote: »
    Shes not protesting anymore. There were 5 people outside Google the other day. 1 of them was the guy in the Halloween costume.

    She just retweets stuff now.

    Village editorial here from the weekend. They double down on calling her a racist.

    https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2019/08/village-editorial-september-gemma-odoherty-2019/

    You forget some of the lunacy. In mid-August she tweeted: “Wondering why the skies over Ireland look so artificial? The psychopathic elite are blocking the sun from us and poisoning the air above us with chemicals. This is genocide”.

    lol!
    Overheal wrote: »
    What’s the quote they made

    From the article in TheNal's link.

    "While O’Doherty is one of the nastiest forces in Irish politics, and getting ever nastier, she has been careful not to hitch herself to clearcut fascism. It would be unfair to call O’Doherty a Nazi now."

    That looks the legally dodgy line - despite the way it's phrased I believe it could be considered to be calling her a Nazi.


  • Options
    #3677
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,164 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    ArmaniJeanss wrote: »
    From the article in TheNal's link.

    "While O’Doherty is one of the nastiest forces in Irish politics, and getting ever nastier, she has been careful not to hitch herself to clearcut fascism. It would be unfair to call O’Doherty a Nazi now."

    That looks the legally dodgy line - despite the way it's phrased I believe it could be considered to be calling her a Nazi.
    It would be unfair to call O’Doherty a Nazi now

    They are very clearly not calling her a nazi. She will be laughed out of court.


  • Options
    #3678
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,723 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    They explicitly say it would be unfair to call her a Nazi and that she hasn’t tied herself to clearcut fascism. How is that defamatory?


  • Options
    #3679
    ArmaniJeanss
    Registered Users Posts: 13,299 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    Overheal wrote: »
    They explicitly say it would be unfair to call her a Nazi and that she hasn’t tied herself to clearcut fascism. How is that defamatory?

    **Not a legal expert**
    In UK&Irl I don't think you can use phrasing like that to get around potential libel.
    You couldn't for example say 'It would be unfair to call Overheal a child-molester' having spent some time discussing the flaws of Overheal - a reasonable interpretation would be that you were trying to make such an accusation in a roundabout way.
    **Not a legal expert**


  • Options
    #3680
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,484 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    The problem for Gems is that shes open in court to having all of her tweets, livestreams, rants etc trawled through and presented in a condensed manner that will make her look completely crazy. Its also possible that her funding may be examined as well as fellow ACI members, silent supporters revealed and so on.

    She doesn't want attention like this on herself just to potentially win a small libel case.

    I hope I'm wrong though.


  • Options
    #3681
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    Isn't that what Fox news do on their ticker? Put loopy statements about people they dont like on screen with a question mark at the end.

    "Obama a terrorist?"


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3682
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,164 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    Isn't that what Fox news do on their ticker? Put loopy statements about people they dont like on screen with a question mark at the end.

    "Obama a terrorist?"

    Except village magazine didnt do that. they were quite explicit that it would be unfair to call her a nazi. there was no innuendo at all.


  • Options
    #3683
    Lackadaisical
    Closed Accounts Posts: 518 ✭✭✭Lackadaisical


    I'm not a legal expert either, but she's claiming she'll be in the High Court tomorrow. That's extremely rapid, given that cases usually take months (sometimes years) to even get to the stage where you're approaching court.

    Also aren't all High Court cases publicly listed? It would be interesting to see how this case progresses ...


  • Options
    #3684
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,164 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Lackadaisical wrote: »
    I'm not a legal expert either, but she's claiming she'll be in the High Court tomorrow. That's extremely rapid, given that cases usually take months (sometimes years) to even get to the stage where you're approaching court.

    Also aren't all High Court cases publicly listed? It would be interesting to see how this case progresses ...

    she is blowing it out of her ass.


  • Options
    #3685
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,723 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    she is blowing it out of her ass.

    Good point probably faster to use the restroom in the high court and then tell people you were there. Of course the implication being you were doing serious things and not... your duty.


  • Options
    #3686
    Stark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,895 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    In the High Court being escorted back outside by security.


  • Options
    #3687
    randd1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,817 ✭✭✭randd1


    Ah, Gemma O'Doherty.

    The answer to the questions "what is nuttier than a squirrels larder" and "who could look at a pint of Guinness and say its perfect because the white rises above the balck".


  • Options
    #3688
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    ArmaniJeanss wrote: »
    **Not a legal expert**
    In UK&Irl I don't think you can use phrasing like that to get around potential libel.
    You couldn't for example say 'It would be unfair to call Overheal a child-molester' having spent some time discussing the flaws of Overheal - a reasonable interpretation would be that you were trying to make such an accusation in a roundabout way.
    **Not a legal expert**

    It's fine around here though. That's why I assume the surprise of posters including mods as to why implications like this without evidence is completely wrong.
    "Oh but I didn't say that exactly" is not a proper excuse but one used oh so often around here by the woke brigade.


  • Options
    #3689
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,164 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Kimsang wrote: »
    It's fine around here though. That's why I assume the surprise of posters including mods as to why implications like this without evidence is completely wrong.
    "Oh but I didn't say that exactly" is not a proper excuse but one used oh so often around here by the woke brigade.

    the article was quite explicit in not calling her a nazi. it is there in black and white. they didnt imply she was a nazi though you seem to have inferred it.


  • Options
    #3690
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 7,991 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    Kimsang wrote: »
    It's fine around here though. That's why I assume the surprise of posters including mods as to why implications like this without evidence is completely wrong.
    "Oh but I didn't say that exactly" is not a proper excuse but one used oh so often around here by the woke brigade.




    Who? Care to name them?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3691
    Sofiztikated
    Registered Users Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Sofiztikated


    Stark wrote: »
    In the High Court being escorted back outside by security.

    Did she just go to the High Court to press the matter, without going through the proper channels?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement