Ibrahim Halawa acquited(mod warning in op-Heed it)

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

gozunda wrote: »

As far as I'm aware he welcomes anyone to point out anything they believe to be incorrect with him directly.

Maybe you should do so rather than throwing rabid accusations.

He does like the idf. He likes them very very very much. Nothing accusatory there.

And this discredits his blog how exactly?

dav3 wrote: »

Oy vey, you're back.

Are you going to stick around this time, or do a runner when people start asking you the difficult questions again?

Ah yes, the UK Sunday Times, your family must be very proud of you having your rant published in a british newspaper.

Why do you think real journalists in Ireland refuse to have any dealings with you?

Your personal dislike for Mr Humphreys is perhaps food for another thread.

However,the remarks about the Sunday Times simply does not bear any form of scrutiny.

The Irish edition of the Sunday Times has been perhaps the ONLY Irish newspaper to investigate issues which the "Native" organs either find problematic,or are requested "Off record" to leave alone.

The Pamela Izevbakhai bandwagon,some years back,was the proving of this,as virtually the entire Irish Media was shown to be lacking in,even the most,basic levels of proffessional detachment when offered a pre-packaged story.

RTE themselves have a substantial amount of unanswered questions as to the reluctance of it's Chief Investigative Reporter,at the time,to actually research & investigate a story,something which was left to the (Irish) Sunday Times to do.

Whatever issues you have with Mark Humphreys (and I would share some of them),these cannot simply be superimposed upon the Sunday Times and used to discredit it.

It is worth noting also,that Mr Humphreys has,via his blog,posed some rather simple questions in relation to the Halawa family's position in relation to their involvement in the "Day of Rage" events,none of which has been directly responded to,either via the Sunday Times or Humphreys blog itself.

As I see it,that right of reply,remains available ?

Vlad Kelly wrote: »

His sisters are all 11s, and I support them in their case against the state at this moment,s.

Why?

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Why?

With the Ibrahim Halawa issue now essentially at an end,it will be interesting to see whether the family will seek to maintain the momentum which they built up around it.

From what can be gathered in Irish media accounts,the sisters in question appear to be pursuing a similar line of attack against the Irish Government,namely that Ireland is failing to recognise their demands in a timely manner,which is resulting in a degree of unnecessary distress being imposed upon them.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/halawa-sisters-complain-of-delay-in-deciding-if-husbands-can-join-them-in-ireland-1.3092181

Omaima and Somaia Halawa, both Irish citizens, have, along with their husbands – Mohamed Abdo Mahmoud Aly and Emadelin Mohamed Arab respectively – taken judicial review proceedings against the Minister in the High Court.

Both men are Egyptian nationals currently residing in Turkey.

Omaima Halawa said she and her husband are expecting their first child in August, but, despite having applied for a Join Spouse visa in October 2015, they have yet to receive a decision. The delay is “deeply distressing”, she said.

The inference can be taken,that the Irish Government is not entitled to apply a more robust protocol in relation to the issuance of Visa's,as a response to events unfolding on a now daily basis involving members of their Politico/Religous grouping ?

The sisters also allege unlawful discrimination against them as Irish citizens exercising their rights concerning free movement rights of EU citizens and their families.

In an affidavit, Omaima Halawa said she met her husband during a family holiday in Turkey in summer 2014 and they married in August 2015 in Istanbul. Her husband applied for a visa in October 2015, but, despite several attempts since then to contact the Visa Office about the status of that, no explanation was given for the delay in deciding it.

Her solicitor was informed in December 2016 by the Department of Justice visa section the application was being considered but no further information would be provided until they got a signed letter of authority from her husband, she said.

Her husband provided that signed letter of authority, and the Department was also given a letter from the Coombe hospital concerning the due date of their baby. Details of the continued detention of her brother were also provided.

It is interesting that the Halawa sisters specifically refer to their Brothers situation in their "join Spouse" visa applications,something which has now materially altered.

Some citizens might see the alleged "Delay" in processing these applications,as being understandable,if not even desirable,given current events worldwide.

The ending of the Ibrahim Halawa case,may well prove to be a mixed blessing in some ways ?

cisk wrote: »

His father is Imam of Dublin's Clonskeagh mosque and represents Irish Muslims at many events.

https://www.rte.ie/news/special-reports/2017/0918/905614-ibrahim-halawa/

This religious nonsense again. He only represents himself and people who asked him to represent them. That's it. He has no reason or right to represent anybody else.

emo72 wrote: »

Thought the way tubridy framed the question, can't remember the exact phrasing though, "shall we start to dismiss the negative questions?" It's as if it was decided that everything negative was fake. Not really the ideal way to approach it.

We could take Turbidy's question literally or that it is in itself a loaded question.

In his phraseology he also appeared to presume that those with concerns were asking 'negative' questions which puts any such questions automatically in a 'negative' light.

Much like the old classic loaded question of "when did you stop beating your wife" the questioner presumes that the respondent has beat his wife at some point - leaving the respondents only avenue to be defensive in reply.

Turbidy also pigeonholed the "haters" as he referred to them without any attempt of defining the term or even in fact if it was relevant to what was been said or by whom.

Both points indicate a certain bias in that interview imo. I would expect better.

Vlad Kelly wrote: »

I'm a strong supporter of Islam in Ireland.

Would it be its inherent homophobia or its rampant misogyny that you appreciate?

Caught this interview last night with my wife half watching it and who didn't have a notion who this person was. Half way through she put down her phone, and stated that 'This guy is hiding something'.

She is correct. He came across terribly, didn't answer any questions directly, and spoke like a novice politician like he was coached by someone last minute. He was anything but honest.

Like, he went over the Egypt to chill and have a summer holiday, by eating ice cream, so he finds himself addressing a large crowd about something political. Come off it, are we idiots?

The fact that his father is an ardent supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, never-mind his statement that Homosexuals are sinful should have more public scrutiny.

He went to the cinema and found himself speaking to a rally in front of thousands?
If he was honest and came clean then people would respect him, but people hate liars like that, its not the lie itself, its the fact that he thinks everyone else is stupid enough to believe his bull****. Its about respect at the end of the day.

If he wont respect people enough to tell us the truth, warts and all, then why should people respect him back?

Silas Most Keypunch wrote:

Liberal.ie are currently conducting a poll. Over half of the respondents say they have changed their mind for the worse after seeing him on the LLS.

Giving that outfit's track record that is unlikely to be a balanced sample of the national mood but there ya go.

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

For some people, it will never be the end until he goes on TV, starts crying and begging forgiveness on his knees, spits on the Muslim Brotherhood flag, then burns it and then takes out a giant picture of Mohammed Badie and starts whacking it in the face with his shoe.

And then there would STILL be people that would not be satisfied.

Wow that is really so deep - nearly as deep as the last poster who used the same stupid hyperbole and like you have failed to read what was posted in this thread.

dav3 wrote: »

Some people appear upset that Ibrahim didn't come out wrapped in the isis flag, proceeded to burn the Irish flag in front of the audience, pulled four passports out of his back pocket…all Egyptian, beheaded Tubridy, and then laughed 'ha ha stupid Irish' at the end.

...?

Completely ridiculous inflamatory tripe

Kivaro wrote: »

Did not watch the 'show' last night but when I read he said "racist people are going to be racist" when asked about the Muslim Brotherhood, it confirmed to me that this response will be the defacto retort to any questions about his involvement with the MLB. Many of his supporters on here are reading from the same hymn sheet. They believe that the racist label will shut down all conversation and stop attempts to question the many obvious lies that he and his family told to the Irish public.

And if anyone dares to question the activities of his father or the Clonskeagh mosque, then the racist accusation will be used there too. It is also no surprise that his sisters are claiming discrimination in their lawsuit against the Irish State.

The Irish news media have really left the people of Ireland down by their partial and biased coverage of these events.

Don't forget their attempts at deflection by throwing in some whataboutery regarding the Catholic church, honestly, it's as though they can't put forward a cohesive argument for some reason, I wonder why that is?

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

It's not tripe. Halawa can't win in this instance.

If he were to come out and denounce the Muslim Brotherhood, there would still be people out there who would say that it was a bull**** apology, that it was just PR and he didn't mean it and that it was all just Taqiyya.

Ulysses Gaze wrote:

For some people, it will never be the end until he goes on TV, starts crying and begging forgiveness on his knees, spits on the Muslim Brotherhood flag, then burns it and then takes out a giant picture of Mohammed Badie and starts whacking it in the face with his shoe.

That is hyperbole and it's tripe ....

It fails to in anyway represent what has been discussed or the concerns detailed on this thread.

If your point is that there may be a small number of individuals who would remain sceptical even after a detailed and obective interview - then that is a possibility. Though that is probably true for any similar controversial issues.

However as that has not happened it is not possible imo to make that conclusion at this point.

That results in neither 'winning' or otherwise ..