What did Aaron Forde say ?

Fr Tod Umptious

So this guy Aaron Forde's appointment as chairman of the Shannon Group has been pulled my Minister Ryan because Mr Forde’s use of social media was “below the standard expected of the chair of a state board.”

So what did he say on social media ?

And when did he say it ?

Odhinn

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

So this guy Aaron Forde's appointment as chairman of the Shannon Group has been pulled my Minister Ryan because Mr Forde’s use of social media was “below the standard expected of the chair of a state board.”

So what did he say on social media ?

And when did he say it ?

Numerous tweets from Forde’s Twitter account prompted the reversal. He has since deleted the account but tweets over recent years criticised the Traveller community, social welfare recipients and called the Tanáiste Leo Varadkar (FG) a leak.

https://www.clareecho.ie/fordes-appointment-as-shannon-group-chair-scrapped/


Can't see his exact words though.

Rodney Bathgate

Great bunch of lads, the travellers.

Fann Linn

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

Great bunch of lads, the travellers.

Are you looking for a job on a state board?

Fr Tod Umptious

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

Great bunch of lads, the travellers.

That paraphrasing of a Fr Ted quote is so over used it stopped being funny in the last century.

Fr Tod Umptious

Odhinn wrote: »

https://www.clareecho.ie/fordes-appointment-as-shannon-group-chair-scrapped/


Can't see his exact words though.

Thanks
Criticising travellers and welfare recipients will not get you far these days.

McMurphy

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Thanks
Criticising travellers and welfare recipients will not get you far these days.

I'd say criticism of both the greens and calling Leo the leak had more to do with it myself tbh.

John Doe1

Ah to be fair, you cant be comming thoughcrime and making Lord Leo look bad. It is not like we are a democracy..

Rodney Bathgate

Fann Linn wrote: »

Are you looking for a job on a state board?

Correct. Gis a job.

blanch152

Well done Eamon Ryan.

People who make tweets like that shouldn't be anywhere near public life.

Now if only other parties had such high standards.

brendane

blanch152 wrote: »

Well done Eamon Ryan.

People who make tweets like that shouldn't be anywhere near public life.

Now if only other parties had such high standards.

What did he a actually say. I cant see the quotes anywhere

Fr Tod Umptious

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Thanks
Criticising travellers and welfare recipients will not get you far these days.

People with ambitions are braindead at times in their use of social media.

Ireland2021

blanch152 wrote: »

Well done Eamon Ryan.

People who make tweets like that shouldn't be anywhere near public life.

Now if only other parties had such high standards.

Surely Eamon would have one of his advisors go throigh his social media

Jobs for the lads

Backfired as usual

Govt of chaos

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Well done Eamon Ryan.

People who make tweets like that shouldn't be anywhere near public life.

Now if only other parties had such high standards.

Leave Leo, Neale and councilor O'Leary out of this please.

Fr Tod Umptious

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

That paraphrasing of a Fr Ted quote is so over used it stopped being funny in the last century.

Nice username.

McMurphy

There's a few more details emerging about what he has posted on social media, which has led to the government of chaos and confusion having to put a halt to his appointment.

Seems he was referring to those in receipt of social welfare, as a derogatory word to describe travellers, and not only that, but sent on to stereotype travellers here..

“Do the kn***ers who are collecting multiple SW (social welfare) payments have one.”

This government can employ individuals to dredge the social media accounts of opposition TDs going back years, but yet don't bother to tell the lads doing the dredging to take a cursory glance at the social media accounts of people they're about to put into high paying, high profile jobs?

I stand over this.

McMurphy wrote: »

I'd say criticism of both the greens and calling Leo the leak had more to do with it myself tbh.

Bad and all as the "kn***er' post was, I strongly suspect it was really posts like these that resulted in the U-turn

Also on social media Mr Forde had described the Green Party on Twitter as “clueless about agriculture, climate and lots of other issues”.

I don't known the timeframe of when he wrote either of the above two posts, but as I was saying about employing people to have a look and dredge the oppositions social media accounts, this post couldn't be any more than a few months old, and yet they didn't do any due diligence whatsoever on him?

This is probably the real reason he's gone.

In another post last summer he said Leo Varadkar is a “narcissist” and also called him “Leo the Leak*” on at least two occasions. Mr Forde said he did not recall these tweets.

*He'll find it tough to shake that label now, seems to be sticking.

Allinall

John Doe1 wrote: »

Ah to be fair, you cant be comming thoughcrime and making Lord Leo look bad. It is not like we are a democracy..

We are indeed a democracy.

Which had a large part in his not getting the job.

Fr Tod Umptious

Amari Colossal Sawhorse wrote: »

People with ambitions are braindead at times in their use of social media.

Braindead is right.
No matter what ones personal thoughts are about things, if they are controversial it's best to keep them off social media, especially if you are a C level executive.

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

Well done Eamon Ryan.

People who make tweets like that shouldn't be anywhere near public life.

Now if only other parties had such high standards.

Only people who agree with your worldview should be allowed near public life. Next - get rid of SF. Amirite?

Personally I think being on Twitter is now a bad idea for everyone.

paw patrol

I don't know if this fella is any good as his job - probably not if they were to appointment him to a state board in the 1st place.

But it's a shocking state of affairs where nobody who doesn't treat those in society without any personal responsibly without anything but veneration can be excluded from a state job.

Tax payers pay for these jobs yet gobsh1tes like the minister use them as rewards. I know this has always been like this but oddly I think I prefer the Bertie days where he was plain corrupt appointing his pals - you knew what was going on - instead of this nonsense where its' all PR and correct think only

AndrewJRenko

paw patrol wrote: »

I don't know if this fella is any good as his job - probably not if they were to appointment in to a state board in the 1st place.

But it's a shocking state of affairs where nobody who doesn't treat those in society without any personal responsibly without anything but veneration can be excluded from a state job.

Tax payers pay for these jobs yet gobsh1tes like the minister use them as rewards. I know this has always been like this but oddly I think I prefer the Bertie days where he was plain corrupt appointing his pals - you knew what was going on - instead of this nonsense where its' all PR and correct think only

There is a middle line of basic humanity that allows for expressing of views without veneration and without calling people knackers. It's not hard really.

paw patrol

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There is a middle line of basic humanity that allows for expressing of views without veneration and without calling people knackers. It's not hard really.

That's where you're wrong kiddo. Repeated bad behavior deserves to be met with contempt

AndrewJRenko

paw patrol wrote: »

That's where you're wrong kiddo. Repeated bad behavior deserves to be met with contempt

My point was a statement of fact, not a matter of opinion.

Fr Tod Umptious

paw patrol wrote: »

I don't know if this fella is any good as his job - probably not if they were to appointment in to a state board in the 1st place.

But it's a shocking state of affairs where nobody who doesn't treat those in society without any personal responsibly without anything but veneration can be excluded from a state job.

Tax payers pay for these jobs yet gobsh1tes like the minister use them as rewards. I know this has always been like this but oddly I think I prefer the Bertie days where he was plain corrupt appointing his pals - you knew what was going on - instead of this nonsense where its' all PR and correct think only

Bit of a sweeping generalisation there.
The guy has been an executive on multiple companies both private and public.
You don't get to that level in the first place without being very good at what you do.

paw patrol

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Bit of a sweeping generalisation there.
The guy has been an executive on multiple companies but private and public.
You don't get to that level in the first place without being very good at what you do.

it sure was a generalised sweeping statement. Also I clearly said I don't know with regard to this fella... It's there in my statement and you even highlighted it in bold. So I'm not sure what your point is?

Anyway I'll counter your argument by saying this after 20plus years in IT in financial Service in Dublin, UK and Channel Islands - a lot of high level managers and directors are poor at their jobs and frauds esp. in leadership capacity. They get by due to deference to the chain of command
So there you are.

paw patrol

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

My point was a statement of fact, not a matter of opinion.

sure thing boss:rolleyes:

Good, for once it's been showed you cant say what you like and get away with it, most especially online, you can think what you like we don't have the thought police.

One of mine had a background check for a job and as part of the background check they check social media accounts they do not ask for passwords or anything like that, it's still a check of groups the persons is involved with and what their online presents is like.

I am sure there are ways around it but the point still stands don't have an online presence that could jeopardise a job offer.

AndrewJRenko

paw patrol wrote: »

sure thing boss:rolleyes:

If you want to give contempt to an entire community, based on the actions of some, fire ahead - but don't be surprised to be held accountable for it in the future.

Fr Tod Umptious

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Bit of a sweeping generalisation there.
The guy has been an executive on multiple companies both private and public.
You don't get to that level in the first place without being very good at what you do.

You can be good at what you do and be a major A*hole at the same time they are not mutually exclusive.

Fr Tod Umptious

paw patrol wrote: »

it sure was a generalised sweeping statement. Also I clearly said I don't know with regard to this fella... It's there in my statement and you even highlighted it in bold. So I'm not sure what your point is?

Anyway I'll counter your argument by saying this after 20plus years in IT in financial Service in Dublin, UK and Channel Islands - a lot of high level managers and directors are poor at their jobs and frauds esp. in leadership capacity. They get by due to deference to the chain of command
So there you are.

You said he was probably not good at his job because he was appointed to a state board in the first place.

That's the sweeping generalisation.

TomTomTim

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

If you want to give contempt to an entire community, based on the actions of some, fire ahead - but don't be surprised to be held accountable for it in the future.

Some? It's well, well beyond a majority of the community. If anyone was honest and made a rough estimate they'd likely be banned regardless of the level of truthfulness. Only those will sheltered lives, or distorted perceptions, could argue with a straight face that it's an issue sole with minority of the community. This is simply another example of society being asked the pretend that reality is not reality.

hi5

Allinall wrote: »

We are indeed a democracy.

Which had a large part in his not getting the job.

Peter Casey also said something derogatory about travellers and he almost got elected president for it.

whisky_galore

Nothing that would count as an unpopular set of opinions in Unpopular Opinions.

Trouble was he used social media and he in his position.

AndrewJRenko

TomTomTim wrote: »

Some? It's well, well beyond a majority of the community. If anyone was honest and made a rough estimate they'd likely be banned regardless of the level of truthfulness. Only those will sheltered lives, or distorted perceptions, could argue with a straight face that it's an issue sole with minority of the community. This is simply another example of society being asked the pretend that reality is not reality.

When has anyone been banned for truthfulness?

Go ahead and present some facts there to support your "majority of the community" claim. You won't get banned for facts.

For Forks Sake

hi5 wrote: »

Peter Casey also said something derogatory about travellers and he almost got elected president for it.

"almost" :rolleyes:

James Brown

McMurphy wrote: »

There's a few more details emerging about what he has posted on social media, which has led to the government of chaos and confusion having to put a halt to his appointment.

Seems he was referring to those in receipt of social welfare, as a derogatory word to describe travellers, and not only that, but sent on to stereotype travellers here..



This government can employ individuals to dredge the social media accounts of opposition TDs going back years, but yet don't bother to tell the lads doing the dredging to take a cursory glance at the social media accounts of people they're about to put into high paying, high profile jobs?

I stand over this.



Bad and all as the "kn***er' post was, I strongly suspect it was really posts like these that resulted in the U-turn



I don't known the timeframe of when he wrote either of the above two posts, but as I was saying about employing people to have a look and dredge the oppositions social media accounts, this post couldn't be any more than a few months old, and yet they didn't do any due diligence whatsoever on him?

This is probably the real reason he's gone.




*He'll find it tough to shake that label now, seems to be sticking.

You would think if he speaks in such a manner, so freely and so often, the people vetting him for the post or people who've dealt with him would have an idea?

Fr Tod Umptious

For Forks Sake wrote: »

"almost" :rolleyes:

In an election where the incumbent was a clear favorite from day one and a very popular figure.

An unknown candidate, without any party backing who said what many were thinking about travelers manages to get 20% of the vote.

Beating the next person (a party candidate), by 13%

That is not insignificant.

blanch152

James Brown wrote: »

You would think if he speaks in such a manner, so freely and so often, the people vetting him for the post or people who've dealt with him would have an idea?

Not necessarily. There was a councillor who had a record of racist, homophobic and misogynist tweets and videos who was nominated by his party for Chair of a county council. It seems that it isn't that easy to vet someone.

Ireland2021

blanch152 wrote: »

Not necessarily. There was a councillor who had a record of racist, homophobic and misogynist tweets and videos who was nominated by his party for Chair of a county council. It seems that it isn't that easy to vet someone.

Deflect

tayto lover

Deleted User wrote: »

Only people who agree with your worldview should be allowed near public life. Next - get rid of SF. Amirite?

I genuinely read that last word as “armalite”.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Not necessarily. There was a councillor who had a record of racist, homophobic and misogynist tweets and videos who was nominated by his party for Chair of a county council. It seems that it isn't that easy to vet someone.

Sounds like a lot alright.
You would think the people who searched his twitter history might have done the same for Forde? Maybe they did.

McMurphy

James Brown wrote: »

Sounds like a lot alright.
You would think the people who searched his twitter history might have done the same for Forde? Maybe they did.

Due diligence is near impossible if you're spending all your resources trawling and trolling through the oppositions social media for the slightest thing to be faux outraged by, from years ago.

I mean the man was referring to Leo as "Leo the Leak" definitely wasn't a lifetime ago, prob a cursory glance at his feeds would have discovered that.

James Brown

McMurphy wrote: »

Due diligence is near impossible if you're spending all your resources trawling and trolling through the oppositions social media for the slightest thing to be faux outraged by, from years ago.

I mean the man was referring to Leo as "Leo the Leak" definitely wasn't a lifetime ago, prob a cursory glance at his feeds would have discovered that.

I wonder were the same trolls trawling to embarrass Eamo?

He could probably argue 'fair comment' in any libel case.

expectationlost

why did this guy step down from the company he was involved with for 16 years in 2019 https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/agri-business/companies/aurivo-ceo-aaron-forde-steps-down-from-co-op-38811658.html and a co-op ? https://www.farmersjournal.ie/aurivo-co-op-boss-on-leave-516235 he had been on extended leave...