Jobstown 6 Not Guilty

FrancieBrady · 03-07-2017 12:46PM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

It's common sense, nothing more.

Get off your high horse before you fall.

You are the one ABOVE the courts of the land.
High horse indeed.

TheDoc · 03-07-2017 12:48PM

howiya wrote: »

I found it very derogatory because I work shifts. It'd be very rare I'd see an early morning and he has the cheek to discount my efforts despite the amount of tax I pay

In fairness it is a well known phrase to reference people that work. It's actually changed meaning a fair bit, where it would have had a particular meaning at one points its now a phrase denoting "go getters" etc.

If you found it derogatory that's likely you taking the phrase out of context, out of meaning, or being a bit sensitive.

I thought his use of the term was pretty clear in context in referencing people that work, and as usual people trying to nitpick unimportant things.

VinLieger · 03-07-2017 12:53PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It was understood that an increase in tax take was required at the time. The USC was a straight tax, transparent and simple. The Irish Water implementation came bundled with a huge amount of dysfunction, bureaucratic bloat and a lack of certainty over a key issue of privatisation. That's why the campaign became such a big church supported by a cross section of Irish society. Some people were protesting because it was a last straw from a financial perspective; some people, like me, protested because of the overarching political failings around its implementation.

But to suggest, as FG attempted to do unsuccessfully, that the protests were just about scroungers unwilling to pay their way is incorrect. Continuing to reiterate it achieves nothing either - those who wish to see a successful implementation of an Irish Water Utility, need to stop putting their fingers in their ears about the many valid criticisms.

I agree IW was fundamentally flawed however the majority of the people who oppose it disagree with ANY water charges regardless of it involves IW or not. They now don't want to pay for bin charges and when Ruth Coppinger was asked directly this morning if they got their way with bin charges would they go after electricity and gas next in a similar manner she completely dodged the question indicating shes afraid of letting her real feelings be known on the issue as it really will finally prove they are the "cant someone else pay for me" party

_Kaiser_ · 03-07-2017 01:00PM

VinLieger wrote: »

I agree IW was fundamentally flawed however the majority of the people who oppose it disagree with ANY water charges regardless of it involves IW or not. They now don't want to pay for bin charges and when Ruth Coppinger was asked directly this morning if they got their way with bin charges would they go after electricity and gas next in a similar manner she completely dodged the question indicating shes afraid of letting her real feelings be known on the issue as it really will finally prove they are the "cant someone else pay for me" party

Ah I see what's happening.. You're confusing a small cadre of high-profile socialist TDs as representing the masses

I think you'll find most people in fact would not support their positions and those who do are a minority who don't vote anyway.

The anti-water charges campaign served as a vehicle for them to rant away, but most of those against charges saw them as "useful idiots" at best. Some of these people marched peacefully, but a lot more just refused to pay the bills and rang their FG/FF TD accordingly (which is why FG eventually started back-tracking on the issue.. albeit too late for GE2016)

FrancieBrady · 03-07-2017 01:01PM

TheDoc wrote: »

In fairness it is a well known phrase to reference people that work. It's actually changed meaning a fair bit, where it would have had a particular meaning at one points its now a phrase denoting "go getters" etc.

If you found it derogatory that's likely you taking the phrase out of context, out of meaning, or being a bit sensitive.

I thought his use of the term was pretty clear in context in referencing people that work, and as usual people trying to nitpick unimportant things.

Yeh, and Joan was using a well know phrase about people with expensive phones. :rolleyes:

The comment was meant to be divisive and derogatory and was.

TheDoc · 03-07-2017 01:03PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It was understood that an increase in tax take was required at the time. The USC was a straight tax, transparent and simple. The Irish Water implementation came bundled with a huge amount of dysfunction, bureaucratic bloat and a lack of certainty over a key issue of privatisation. That's why the campaign became such a big church supported by a cross section of Irish society. Some people were protesting because it was a last straw from a financial perspective; some people, like me, protested because of the overarching political failings around its implementation.

But to suggest, as FG attempted to do unsuccessfully, that the protests were just about scroungers unwilling to pay their way is incorrect. Continuing to reiterate it achieves nothing either - those who wish to see a successful implementation of an Irish Water Utility, need to stop putting their fingers in their ears about the many valid criticisms.

I think the problem, and the fear created by precident from the Water Charge fiasco is that it will be difficult to impossible to implement any charges for infrastructural improvements or service, regardless of the robustness of the implementation.

But that does firmly lay at the feat of Government and more so the senior civil servants who as usual just squandered money. I know in my sector, there is a running joke about at some point in your career get a government contract, cause you'll never make more money for easier work.

IW was quickly dismantled by critical analysis as being an absolute sham, and that is fine and undeniable. I guess the larger problem is peoples unwillingness to accept "charges" regardless of the implementation.

It wasn't the people orchestrating protests that were unveiling and revealing the true extent of how bad the setup was, it was more meticulous, economic/fiscal aware TD's in the Dail and genuine investigative journalism

TheDoc · 03-07-2017 01:05PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yeh, and Joan was using a well know phrase about people with expensive phones. :rolleyes:

The comment was meant to be divisive and derogatory and was.

That was a fair enough comment. And I felt it was about time that stuff was said.

Like a previous point, people's inability and unwillingness to adapt to the situation and the scenario that they are in. Hearing people on social welfare on the news giving out about how they can't go on a sun holiday...like seriously, like its some form of human right. Giving out about the social home being provided, that they rejected, because it wasn't close enough to a school they wanted, or the grandparents, or have a big enough backgarden. Hearing landlords of other properties looking for sympathy because their family home they bought completely out of their means is in negative equity and the bank are looking to repossess.

There are genuine cases of hardship and difficulty being experienced, and the nonsense and rubbish does nothing but diminish the genuine cases of struggle out there.

I fully understood and supported that comment, as its something plenty of us see and say everyday. She had people screaming in her face about how a Water Charge of a few euro a week was going to cripple that person or their family, while they record it on a 700 euro phone.....

There is a difference between people just calling a spade a spade and finally calling out the bollox and nonsense as opposed to being genuinely derogatory.

FrancieBrady · 03-07-2017 01:08PM

TheDoc wrote: »

That was a fair enough comment. And I felt it was about time that stuff was said.

Like a previous point, people's inability and unwillingness to adapt to the situation and the scenario that they are in. Hearing people on social welfare on the news giving out about how they can't go on a sun holiday...like seriously, like its some form of human right. Giving out about the social home being provided, that they rejected, because it wasn't close enough to a school they wanted, or the grandparents, or have a big enough backgarden. Hearing landlords of other properties looking for sympathy because their family home they bought completely out of their means is in negative equity and the bank are looking to repossess.

There are genuine cases of hardship and difficulty being experienced, and the nonsense and rubbish does nothing but diminish the genuine cases of struggle out there.

I fully understood and supported that comment, as its something plenty of us see and say everyday. She had people screaming in her face about how a Water Charge of a few euro a week was going to cripple that person or their family, while they record it on a 700 euro phone.....

There is a difference between people just calling a spade a spade and finally calling out the bollox and nonsense as opposed to being genuinely derogatory.

The WC protests were the culmination of something. They were not lone standing.
All classes of people had had enough and took to the streets.

VinLieger · 03-07-2017 01:12PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Ah I see what's happening.. You're confusing a small cadre of high-profile socialist TDs as representing the masses

I think you'll find most people in fact would not support their positions and those who do are a minority who don't vote anyway.

The anti-water charges campaign served as a vehicle for them to rant away, but most of those against charges saw them as "useful idiots" at best. Some of these people marched peacefully, but a lot more just refused to pay the bills and rang their FG/FF TD accordingly (which is why FG eventually started back-tracking on the issue.. albeit too late for GE2016)

Well yes they do represent the masses cus people choose to follow them. When Coppinger or Murphy jumps on the radio about their complete opposition to water charges of any kind they don't parse the numbers to say well out of the number of people who refused to pay water charges here's the breakdown of who agrees with water charges in principle but is just against IW and who agrees with us in our complete refusal of charges of any kind. They claim all people marching or refusing to pay them as agreeing with them 100%

FrancieBrady · 03-07-2017 01:17PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Well yes they do represent the masses cus people choose to follow them. When Coppinger or Murphy jumps on the radio about their complete opposition to water charges of any kind they don't parse the numbers to say well out of the number of people who refused to pay water charges here's the breakdown of who agrees with water charges in principle but is just against IW and who agrees with us in our complete refusal of charges of any kind. They claim all people marching or refusing to pay them as agreeing with them 100%

Like any politician ever.

This thread is not about Coppinger's or Murphy's politics btw.

howiya · 03-07-2017 01:23PM

TheDoc wrote: »

In fairness it is a well known phrase to reference people that work. It's actually changed meaning a fair bit, where it would have had a particular meaning at one points its now a phrase denoting "go getters" etc.

If you found it derogatory that's likely you taking the phrase out of context, out of meaning, or being a bit sensitive.

I thought his use of the term was pretty clear in context in referencing people that work, and as usual people trying to nitpick unimportant things.

If he wanted to mention people who work, why didn't he say that?

VinLieger · 03-07-2017 01:30PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Like any politician ever.

This thread is not about Coppinger's or Murphy's politics btw.

The thread is about the Jobstown 6 who claimed at every point that the trial was politically motivated so yes therefore the thread is also about their politics cus they claim that's what the trial was about.

Also hilarious saying "Like any politician ever. " cus if a FG was doing the same you would be all over it but cus its murphy and coppinger its grand cus everyone does it

Typical trots logic always trying to have their cake and eat it too.

BillyBobBS · 03-07-2017 01:30PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It was understood that an increase in tax take was required at the time. The USC was a straight tax, transparent and simple. The Irish Water implementation came bundled with a huge amount of dysfunction, bureaucratic bloat and a lack of certainty over a key issue of privatisation. That's why the campaign became such a big church supported by a cross section of Irish society. Some people were protesting because it was a last straw from a financial perspective; some people, like me, protested because of the overarching political failings around its implementation.

But to suggest, as FG attempted to do unsuccessfully, that the protests were just about scroungers unwilling to pay their way is incorrect. Continuing to reiterate it achieves nothing either - those who wish to see a successful implementation of an Irish Water Utility, need to stop putting their fingers in their ears about the many valid criticisms.

The worrying thing is FG seem to have learnt a grand total of zero from the IW fiasco. I attended two separate protests against IW and the thing that stuck me the most was the different types of people who participated in those events. FG made a massive boo boo trying to discredit everyone as tracksuit wearing scumbags and it's backfired, badly.

FrancieBrady · 03-07-2017 01:34PM

VinLieger wrote: »

The thread is about the Jobstown 6 who claimed at every point that the trial was politically motivated so yes therefore the thread is also about their politics cus they claim that's what the trial was about.

Also hilarious saying "Like any politician ever. " cus if a FG was doing the same you would be all over it but cus its murphy and coppinger its grand cus everyone does it

Typical trots logic always trying to have their cake and eat it too.

You'll be able to show how this 'trot' is all over a FG or any other politician doing it so.

I'll save you some time, you won't find it.

TheDoc · 03-07-2017 01:35PM

howiya wrote: »

If he wanted to mention people who work, why didn't he say that?

Because he is a politician

Sometimes they get bogged down in trying to be so clever, or so generic as to not cause offence, they inevitably cause offence.

But if I was you, I wouldn't take offence to what he said. He was very much talking about, and wanting to empower and protect the likes of you and me. He was referencing people that work.

In saying that, what I wasn't overly impressed from that spiel was the pure focus on the working people of the country. There is many in our society who from genuine issue or reasoning cannot work, and those people should be looked after, by the likes of you and me who can work, through our taxation.

In fairness with Varadker, many give him credit and gave him credit and credence for being a no bull**** no frills politician but I found him early on to be like the rest, all big talk until push comes to shove. He wasn't overly impressive in his minsteries apart from soundbites and a few weak initiatives here and there, but ultimately failed to live up to his own self billing.

And his latest gaffe of somehow indicating there is widespread welfare fraud that is having some form of tangible impact on proceedings, well if you believe that...

It's a popularist measure playing on the stereotype we all portray, be it foreigners coming over knowing the ins and outs milking the system, or the systematic scroungers. Low hanging fruit to get people onside and look like something tangible is being done, when the reality is it's not really changing anything, for better or worse.

TheDoc · 03-07-2017 01:40PM

BillyBobBS wrote: »

The worrying thing is FG seem to have learnt a grand total of zero from the IW fiasco. I attended two separate protests against IW and the thing that stuck me the most was the different types of people who participated in those events. FG made a massive boo boo trying to discredit everyone as tracksuit wearing scumbags and it's backfired, badly.

Yet at the same time shouldn't be ignored there was plenty of them that were just **** stirrers and troublemakers overtaking what maybe was a peaceful intended protest to cause hassle.

I was living in Swords at the time and granted I knew the people who organised one there and I would give them credit for being generally active, credible and mature people (the actual people who were involved, not Clare Daly) and the one that took place outside my house quickly got overtaken by a rake load of the known troublemakers and knackers and lifetime scroungers.

Was also present at one in Clare Hall that I remember got some media time as it was felt the Guardaí were heavy handed, but what was carefully edited from the clips (thankfully released in full by other people) was the amount of shams that came along and started pushing the crowd from behind into the Guards to incite a riot, and throwing sly digs at police then scarpering back into the back of the crowd.

I know from all I heard from people witnessing them or attending, the ones that genuinely got messy, it was all instigated by toerags coming along just looking for trouble. The one in Coolock sure had posts going on with people suggesting ways to get the Guardaí's attention that they would need to respond to leave the meter installers on their own.

As usual it was poor from FG to tarnish everyone with the same brush, but it shouldn't be lost or ignored that there was plenty of disgraceful and shambolic carry on, as much as there was mature, proper, protest and demonstration taking place.

VinLieger · 03-07-2017 01:48PM

TheDoc wrote: »

Yet at the same time shouldn't be ignored there was plenty of them that were just **** stirrers and troublemakers overtaking what maybe was a peaceful intended protest to cause hassle.

I was living in Swords at the time and granted I knew the people who organised one there and I would give them credit for being generally active, credible and mature people (the actual people who were involved, not Clare Daly) and the one that took place outside my house quickly got overtaken by a rake load of the known troublemakers and knackers and lifetime scroungers.

Was also present at one in Clare Hall that I remember got some media time as it was felt the Guardaí were heavy handed, but what was carefully edited from the clips (thankfully released in full by other people) was the amount of shams that came along and started pushing the crowd from behind into the Guards to incite a riot, and throwing sly digs at police then scarpering back into the back of the crowd.

I know from all I heard from people witnessing them or attending, the ones that genuinely got messy, it was all instigated by toerags coming along just looking for trouble. The one in Coolock sure had posts going on with people suggesting ways to get the Guardaí's attention that they would need to respond to leave the meter installers on their own.

As usual it was poor from FG to tarnish everyone with the same brush, but it shouldn't be lost or ignored that there was plenty of disgraceful and shambolic carry on, as much as there was mature, proper, protest and demonstration taking place.

Both sides are as bad as each other in this case, while yes it was silly for FG to try paint everyone protesting with the same brush the other side are equally as guilty of ignoring the bad element present causing the issues and blaming the gardai for all the problems

FrancieBrady · 03-07-2017 01:51PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Both sides are as bad as each other in this case, while yes it was silly for FG to try paint everyone protesting with the same brush the other side are equally as guilty of ignoring the bad element present causing the issues and blaming the gardai for all the problems

There is another side, the side that thinks that the separation of powers in this country is far too dubious and needs reform.

spoonerhead · 03-07-2017 02:58PM

Seeing some of the posters going up in my area today are clearing playing on people emotions in working class area's. A photo of Leo and May on top of a photo of the Jobstown protestors. Most people including myself who work for minimum wage are absolutely terrified of Varadkar. Generally people around my area don't see his statements as 'for the workers' instead as a plutocracy, while I don't see that as the definitive truth I can see Sinn Fein actually winning from this rather than the new left groups like PBP and Solidarity

TheDoc · 03-07-2017 03:13PM

spoonerhead wrote: »

Seeing some of the posters going up in my area today are clearing playing on people emotions in working class area's. A photo of Leo and May on top of a photo of the Jobstown protestors. Most people including myself who work for minimum wage are absolutely terrified of Varadkar. Generally people around my area don't see his statements as 'for the workers' instead as a plutocracy, while I don't see that as the definitive truth I can see Sinn Fein actually winning from this rather than the new left groups like PBP and Solidarity

Mind me asking why is that the case?

Genuine question, don't have a loaded response.

spoonerhead · 03-07-2017 04:31PM

TheDoc wrote: »

Mind me asking why is that the case?

Genuine question, don't have a loaded response.

Without going into it too much, we feel more vulnerable as we have less than others. Our local 'left alternative' also feed into that by saying it's us who will pay the price for any higher income tax breaks.

Basically someone from Castleknock won't have the same problems as someone from Crumlin, so this fear becomes resentment

Are Am Eye · 03-07-2017 05:28PM

spoonerhead wrote: »

Basically someone from Castleknock

He lives in a fairly shabby flat in Clonsilla, if that makes you feel any better.

McMurphy · 03-07-2017 07:00PM

tayto lover wrote: »

I was on many water protests, all peaceful.
From what I saw on the t.v. the day of the Jobstown protest I just cannot figure how these thugs got off.

They got off, because they stood accused of false imprisonment, the jury however decided that they weren't guilty of that particular offence, (quite rightly) and so they walked away.

Burton, who I don't like, was clearly restrained and couldn't leave the area because of a mob banging her car and sitting in front and behind it screaming abuse at her and the garda.
I didn't attend any protests after seeing that. It was just thuggery.

Well many people disagree with this opinion, including members of the gardai (the pilot audio is pretty clear cut on it)

As for the people who were banging the car and being abusive, I do not think any of the people the thread is about (Paul Murphy and his Co defendants) were doing any of the banging and the abusing.

The gards should have identified those who were doing it, and arrested and charged them, but instead it looks like the gards were preoccupied collaborating their contradictory statements and recollection of events, that resulted in the judge instructing the jury to disregard it.

Whatever about the shameful stuff that went on that day, the fact that members of the states police force stood and lied in court of law, in a vain effort to secure the conviction of innocent people was much more shameful imo.

Just another example of why the gards need to be given the RUC/PSNI treatment, and be rebuilt from the ground up, the rot from within it is rife.

spoonerhead · 03-07-2017 07:17PM

Are Am Eye wrote: »

He lives in a fairly shabby flat in Clonsilla, if that makes you feel any better.

Not sure what to make of that....

Professor Moriarty · 03-07-2017 07:32PM

Are Am Eye wrote: »

He lives in a fairly shabby flat in Clonsilla, if that makes you feel any better.

Actually, it does.

03-07-2017 08:52PM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

No I didn't, but he's the ringleader of the whole thing and we all know it.

No, we do not all "know it".

The jury, who heard all the evidence, which you did not, have unanimously agreed that he is not guilty of any such thing. Even the leader of the Labour party has said the Prosecution got this wrong.

Again I say, it is utterly bizarre that those who are jumping up and down about 'law and order' seem to demonstrate no respect for the courts and for the Rule of Law, which is a cornerstone of our democratic society.

McMurphy · 03-07-2017 08:58PM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Throwing out the trial does not mean they weren't guilty. It simply means there wasn't enough concrete evidence for a safe conviction.

The dogs on the street know they were guilty.

The trial wasn't thrown out, it was heard in full, and reached a conclusion.

The jury concluded that those on trial were not guilty of the charge made against them. You can jump up and down and perform mental and grammatical gymnastics all you like, but thems the facts regardless.

RustyNut · 03-07-2017 09:00PM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

The dogs on the street know they were guilty.

The only people guilty of false imprisonment in this case were the Guards. Isn't that why the charges were dropped against Ken Purcell, his detention by AGS was found to be unlawful.

FrancieBrady · 03-07-2017 09:02PM

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No, we do not all "know it".

The jury, who heard all the evidence, which you did not, have unanimously agreed that he is not guilty of any such thing. Even the leader of the Labour party has said the Prosecution got this wrong.

Again I say, it is utterly bizarre that those who are jumping up and down about 'law and order' seem to demonstrate no respect for the courts and for the Rule of Law, which is a cornerstone of our democratic society.

It beggars belief that from the very first page of the thread that there are people calling 'shame' that innocent people didn't go to jail.

FrancieBrady · 03-07-2017 09:25PM

How squeamish would people here be about the separation of powers if this story turns out to be true. Chilling is not the word for it.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2017/07/03/chilling-4/

Jobstown 6 Not Guilty

Comments