More from Roderic O'Gorman (MOD NOTE IN OPENING POST)

Eric Cartman

excludedbin wrote: »

By calling for his hanging? Pull the other one. They were an angry mob whipped up by the usual anti-everything lot whose only mistake was loudly declaring their intentions by making heavy use of depicting nooses. Maybe you agree with them, because your defence of it is nothing short of baffling otherwise. It's not exactly something ambiguous, they were clearly there calling for his hanging.


The fact that they were calling for the hanging of a gay, left wing politician because he's gay and left wing is what makes it fascist. He's not a paedophile, no matter how much they insist he is. Let the useless idiots present some evidence if they have it but if they did, you can be damn sure they would've by now.

It's more bully-boy tactics by the far right, trying to threaten and intimidate a politician who won't kowtow to them. I'm glad O'Gorman is standing up and I only hope more people follow his example. Those scumbags have no place in Irish society.

please explain where they called for the hanging of the minister, is there any sign with his name next to a noose, is there any inference that he is a paedophile - no. you've made something up to fit your narrative.

AndrewJRenko

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I think such a person would have seen it as an anti-paedophile / anti child gender swapping demonstration . I think you need to look past your own views of the national party and see that despite who they are and what you (correctly ) think of them, that a lot of people went to that protest purely to speak out against the childrens minister, the bill he inherited and Peter tatchell.

PbP hold anti homelessness demonstrations all the time, Brendan ogle's home sweet home / Apollo house thing etc.. were all directly branded by, funded by and headed up by absolute dyed in the wool marxists. Not everyone who went to those protests or donated would want to see the political Ireland those people would want, they wanted to raise awareness for the homeless, I agree that Barrett had political aims with that protest just as ogle or Paul Murphy did with theirs, it doesn't make the protest a 'fascist' one the same way every homeless march wasnt a socialist one.

I've never seen anyone bring along professionally printed posters showing nooses at any demonstration that I've taken part in. Do you often see nooses at other posters that you take part in Eric?

I'm still confused a bit by what you mean by 'anti-paedo' demonstration. For example, an anti-homelessness demonstration is normally calling on government to take action to eradicate homelessness. What is the objective of an 'anti-paedophile' demonstration?

And what is the objective of an 'an anti child gender swapping' demonstration. Are you saying that transgender children don't exist, or should be locked up somewhere or what?

Eric Cartman

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I've never seen anyone bring along professionally printed posters showing nooses at any demonstration that I've taken part in. Do you often see nooses at other posters that you take part in Eric?

I'm still confused a bit by what you mean by 'anti-paedo' demonstration. For example, an anti-homelessness demonstration is normally calling on government to take action to eradicate homelessness. What is the objective of an 'anti-paedophile' demonstration?

And what is the objective of an 'an anti child gender swapping' demonstration. Are you saying that transgender children don't exist, or should be locked up somewhere or what?

"tyrants get the rope" "eat the rich" "burn the bankers" , burning epitaphs of the pope at repeal rallies , lets not pretend a picture of a noose next to a sign saying 'punish paedophiles' is anything new in protest alarmism.

RWCNT

Eric Cartman wrote: »

in the same way that 'black people are all good at basketball' is racist. In cases it might anecdotally present itself as true, and most professional basketball players are black , but to automatically assume any given black person is better at basketball than another race is a racial stereotype. In the same way that presuming white people are automatically not discriminated against / have advantages for being white is prejudiced and a stereotype.

it is a trait specifically directed towards a singular race emphasising a difference purely based on race.

To suggest all black people are good at basketball is to suggest that they have certain characteristics by virtue of their race - a biological reality inherent regardless of societal context. White privilege is based around the idea that white people are less likely to face racism, not due to possessing some special set of characteristics, but simply by virtue of being the majority in a country. It's more a statement on society itself than about the traits of white people.

I've lived in England for a good few years and have been unfortunate enough to have had the occasional disparaging comment made to me about my nationality. Surely you'd agree this is more likely to happen to me in a country where I'm the minority than where the majority share my nationality?

excludedbin

Eric Cartman wrote: »

please explain where they called for the hanging of the minister, is there any sign with his name next to a noose, is there any inference that he is a paedophile - no. you've made something up to fit your narrative.

Well if you're at a point where you need me to guide your hand and join the dots of holding a banner and signs with nooses, and protesting outside the Dáil in the immediate aftermath of the controversy surrounding O'Gorman while claiming it's "anti paedophilia"... You're either beyond my ability to help or you support them. I'm guessing it's more the latter.

The banner literally said "punish the guilty". And had a picture of a noose on it. And they were outside the Dáil. After the same loopers were pushing the idea that O'Gorman is a paedophile.

I'm kind of absolutely astonished that you actually think anyone would be stupid or gullible enough to believe their purpose was anything other than to call for his hanging.

Annasopra

Eric Cartman wrote: »

"tyrants get the rope" "eat the rich" "burn the bankers" , burning epitaphs of the pope at repeal rallies , lets not pretend a picture of a noose next to a sign saying 'punish paedophiles' is anything new in protest alarmism.

Those Noose posters are seriously ****ed up and disturbing. Cant believe people are trying to downplay them. I never saw any Pope burning at a repeal rally. Ever.

Eric Cartman

RWCNT wrote: »

To suggest all black people are good at basketball is to suggest that they have certain characteristics by virtue of their race - a biological reality inherent regardless of societal context. White privilege is based around the idea that white people are less likely to face racism, not due to possessing some special set of characteristics, but simply by virtue of being the majority in a country. It's more a statement on society itself than about the traits of white people.

I've lived in England for a good few years and have been unfortunate enough to have had the occasional disparaging comment made to me about my nationality. Surely you'd agree this is more likely to happen to me in a country where I'm the minority than where the majority share my nationality?

ok, but what proportion of the world is white , should white priviledge not be refined to 'white priviledge in most of North America and most of europe' because it certainly doesn't exist in South America, Asia, Africa, the Middle East'

If I go to Senegal tomorrow I have no privilege whatsoever, I will be discriminated against, far worse than somebody from Senegal would be in Ireland. However for some reason me being able to walk around less than half the earth and not endure any discrimination based on being white deserves its own term. Are there white people in Senegal petitioning schools to teach kids about black privilege ?

Eric Cartman

excludedbin wrote: »

Well if you're at a point where you need me to guide your hand and join the dots of holding a banner and signs with nooses, and protesting outside the Dáil in the immediate aftermath of the controversy surrounding O'Gorman while claiming it's "anti paedophilia"... You're either beyond my ability to help or you support them. I'm guessing it's more the latter.

The banner literally said "punish the guilty". And had a picture of a noose on it. And they were outside the Dáil. After the same loopers were pushing the idea that O'Gorman is a paedophile.

I'm kind of absolutely astonished that you actually think anyone would be stupid or gullible enough to believe their purpose was anything other than to call for his hanging.

one quote, give me one quote where that is even heavily implied by even the most fruit loopy one of them.

RWCNT

Eric Cartman wrote: »

ok, but what proportion of the world is white , should white priviledge not be refined to 'white priviledge in most of North America and most of europe' because it certainly doesn't exist in South America, Asia, Africa, the Middle East'

If I go to Senegal tomorrow I have no privilege whatsoever, I will be discriminated against, far worse than somebody from Senegal would be in Ireland. However for some reason me being able to walk around less than half the earth and not endure any discrimination based on being white deserves its own term. Are there white people in Senegal petitioning schools to teach kids about black privilege ?

As far as I'm aware the idea does pretty much exclusively refer to the areas you refer to. Peggy McIntosh, who coined the term, was clear she was referring to western society in her writings.

I'd agree that you'll basically lose that privilege in a non-majority white country, and I can't answer your question about white people in Senegal. I've actually wondered that myself to be honest. It doesn't impact my opinion of the concept being taught here though and I don't see why it should.

AndrewJRenko

Eric Cartman wrote: »

one quote, give me one quote where that is even heavily implied by even the most fruit loopy one of them.

How about this one quote;
https://twitter.com/irishciara27/status/1280070075962310656?s=20

Eric Cartman wrote: »

"tyrants get the rope" "eat the rich" "burn the bankers" , burning epitaphs of the pope at repeal rallies , lets not pretend a picture of a noose next to a sign saying 'punish paedophiles' is anything new in protest alarmism.

'Burn the Bondholders' referred to the bondholders losing their bonds, their money. It didn't refer to arson.

There was no 'get the rope' or burning of any effigies at repeal rallies. That's just your own little fantasy.

excludedbin

Eric Cartman wrote: »

one quote, give me one quote where that is even heavily implied by even the most fruit loopy one of them.

Why a quote when even you should be able to understand pictograms? Why did they protest outside the Dáil in the immediate aftermath of the controversy with pictures of nooses if they meant something else? Why? They could literally have done or said absolutely anything else, shown any other picture of symbol, protested anywhere else - anything.

But they chose that place, that time, and pictures of nooses. I'm sorry but if you can't understand that then it's clear you either support them or you're beyond help.

Here's the closest I can find: https://twitter.com/NationalPartyIE/status/1283167428168605696/photo/1

"The highest level of government"
What government do you propose he's talking about? And he was leading that protest that said "punish the guilty" with pictures of nooses. Therefore, he was advocating "punishing" i.e. lynching, anyone "at the highest level of government" that they deem a paedophile, immediately following his own followers spreading the lie that O'Gorman endorsed Tatchell's views, i.e. is a paedophile.

If you need any more than that then I'm done with you. Tired of watching people defending the violent thugs of the NP when it's plain as ****ing day what's going on.

Eric Cartman

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How about this one quote;
https://twitter.com/irishciara27/status/1280070075962310656?s=20


'Burn the Bondholders' referred to the bondholders losing their bonds, their money. It didn't refer to arson.

There was no 'get the rope' or burning of any effigies at repeal rallies. That's just your own little fantasy.

you really had to dig very deep to find that tweet, clearly a bot account set up in march to reblog mad stuff. Nothing from anyone at the march though no ?

excludedbin

Hang on you said "one quote, give me one quote where that is even heavily implied by even the most fruit loopy one of them." and you got your quote. Sounds like you didn't expect anything to come of your demand and now you're hastily shifting the goalposts.

Please explain where it says it's a bot account. Since apparently you only accept explicit admissions.

excludedbin

Well here's some more:

https://twitter.com/LOCthedreamer1/status/1283478029470183430

https://twitter.com/IrexitFreedom/status/1281986124890742785

"We sent a clear message to @rodericogorman"

https://twitter.com/Redhead63975379/status/1280216265047576576

https://twitter.com/Grange09991182/status/1283467509107175424

"championing of a paedophile activist"

https://twitter.com/EmmetCilldara/status/1280839548491255812

https://twitter.com/johnconnors1990/status/1279791132201885703

John Connors was at the march, too.

https://twitter.com/firinnemedia/status/1281946674282274817

Another one who was at the march.

Shall I go on?

excludedbin

https://twitter.com/firinnemedia/status/1282266376409841664

https://twitter.com/Lorrain03294086/status/1283507126996852736

https://twitter.com/firinnemedia/status/1282315142114562048

That one is very telling!

https://twitter.com/MikeHun84883254/status/1283231775834157056

https://twitter.com/MikeHun84883254/status/1283318251301285888

https://twitter.com/FlyingColumn8/status/1283080753560133634

https://twitter.com/lucia1905340572/status/1282345190867558401

I can keep going if you want.

Eric Cartman

excludedbin wrote: »

Well here's some more:

https://twitter.com/LOCthedreamer1/status/1283478029470183430

https://twitter.com/IrexitFreedom/status/1281986124890742785

"We sent a clear message to @rodericogorman"

https://twitter.com/Redhead63975379/status/1280216265047576576

https://twitter.com/Grange09991182/status/1283467509107175424

"championing of a paedophile activist"

https://twitter.com/EmmetCilldara/status/1280839548491255812

https://twitter.com/johnconnors1990/status/1279791132201885703

John Connors was at the march, too.

https://twitter.com/firinnemedia/status/1281946674282274817

Another one who was at the march.

Shall I go on?

"minister's links to a paedophile apologist" "associating with a paedophile apologist" are true and are not calling the minister a paedophile.

excludedbin

No, they're not true. Being photographed next to someone is not "associating with". More goalpost shifting, I see.

ronivek

Eric Cartman wrote: »

"minister's links to a paedophile apologist" "associating with a paedophile apologist" are true and are not calling the minister a paedophile.

Mostly I find people using the term 'apologist' are implying they are actually the thing they're supposedly 'apologising' for. In many cases this is a categorical fact: such as 'Catholic apologists' being members of the Catholic Church and so on.

It's a handy way to wriggle out of making the actual accusation of course; because you can call anyone you like an apologist without having even the slightest shred of evidence. And then like you are right now you can claim 'but I was just calling him an apologist like' when you're called up on it.

castle2012

I'm sorry but there is to much baggage here with this guy and I'm a green voter. Been a children's minister. He must go

AndrewJRenko

Eric Cartman wrote: »

you really had to dig very deep to find that tweet, clearly a bot account set up in march to reblog mad stuff. Nothing from anyone at the march though no ?

You asked for one quote and you got one quote. If you'd like to post the Twitter handles of all the noose-enthusiasts at the march, then I'll be glad to review their tweets.

castle2012

Here is another post. Disgraceful encouraging violence a só called children's minister

AndrewJRenko

castle2012 wrote: »

Here is another post. Disgraceful encouraging violence a só called children's minister

Is that really the best you got? A ten year old out-of-context reply?

castle2012

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Is that really the best you got? A ten year old out-of-context reply?

Males encouraging volience against female's never acceptable. Any person who even trys to justice should be barred from boards.ie

drunkmonkey

The expert group behind this policy besides Sara Philips as we already know she's met Tatchell who else could be on Mattie McGraths radar.


Moninne Griffith, BeLonGTo (Chair)

Dearbháil Nic Giolla Mhicíl, Department of Employment Affairs & Social Protection

Olive McGovern,Department of Children &Youth Affairs

Gráinne Morrissey,Department of Education&Science

Nuala Ní Mhuircheartaigh,Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade

Diane Nurse, Health Service Executive

Tracy O’Keeffe, Departmentof Justice & Equality (Civil Law Reform Division)

Adam Egan, Departmentof Justice & Equality (Equality Division)

Dr.Tanya Ní Mhuirthile, Dublin City University

Séamus Byrne, IndividualiTy

Sara Phillips,Transgender Equality Network Ireland (TENI)

Michele Clarke, Chief Social Worker, Department of Children &Youth Affairs

Anne O’Donnell, Manager, Hub na nÓg -Young Voices in Decision-making

AndrewJRenko

castle2012 wrote: »

Males encouraging volience against female's never acceptable. Any person who even trys to justice should be barred from boards.ie

"trys to justice"?

Why didn't you give the full context of the tweet?

https://twitter.com/heterotextual/status/88509803890085888?s=19

Do you think that it was intended to be taken literally?

AndrewJRenko

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The expert group behind this policy besides Sara Philips as we already know she's met Tatchell who else could be on Mattie McGraths radar.

I thought it was Tatchell that was on Mattie's radar. Is anyone who ever met Tatchell now suspect? Does that include everyone who attended the Pride parade that year?

jam_mac_jam

Jesus christ. Literally trawling through ten years of twitter to try and get anything.

He distanced himself from the original tweet and said the views were abhorrent. A week later and this is still meant to be a big deal.

The hysterics is a bit much.

excludedbin

For some reason the person he responded to deleted their tweet but this is what I found when I looked for it:

Doesn't add that much more context to it, though. However: https://twitter.com/rodericogorman/status/88380883152801792

So, with that in mind, more than likely it's a joke considering she was hardly the one to have stolen it and obviously O'Gorman knows that.

Honestly, the depths our homophobic twerps are sinking to now are nothing short of pathetic. Also I can't believe I wasted my time on this tonight. I demand fair compensation!

jam_mac_jam

It's all so stupid like anyone really believes he is a paedophile or holds the view the age of consent should be lowered or that is even on the table. It's not going to happen or even be raised.

Just hysteria over nothing.

It reminds me of the satanic panic.

Eric Cartman

excludedbin wrote: »

For some reason the person he responded to deleted their tweet but this is what I found when I looked for it:

Doesn't add that much more context to it, though. However: https://twitter.com/rodericogorman/status/88380883152801792

So, with that in mind, more than likely it's a joke considering she was hardly the one to have stolen it and obviously O'Gorman knows that.

Honestly, the depths our homophobic twerps are sinking to now are nothing short of pathetic. Also I can't believe I wasted my time on this tonight. I demand fair compensation!

so you can assume that 'break her legs' is a joke, which it more than likely is, but 'associated with a paedophile sympathiser' is a shady way of calling a man a a paedophile and must be interpreted in the most serious and awful way.... got it ...