Peter Casey believes Travellers should not be recognised as an ethnic minority

We should see if all the presidential candidates, apart from Peter Casey, would like to live in the 6 houses.

wexie wrote: »

No not at all, I'm genuinely wondering have any other arguments been it forward as to why these houses are unsuitable to their particular needs.

If it really is stables and grazing then someone really needs to sit these people down regarding the realities of social housing.

If they are making an argument they are entitled to houses with stables and grazing based on being a protected ethnic minority well....

well these are the original arguments

“They were to be built with a half-acre behind each house, with two stables,” Philip McCarthy, one of the residents of the “unauthorised” occupation at Cabragh Bridge, said at the weekend.
“They [Tipperary County Council] changed it to a group project, like a mini-housing estate... The agreement was two stables and a half an acre for the horses, but they never came up with that.”
Mr McCarthy, who is in his 40s and has lived on the bridge all his life, said the council made the original agreement with his late father, William McCarthy, more than a decade ago.
However, the council said they have provided what they said they would provide.

“Our livestock is our culture, and a big, big part of our life,” Mr McCarthy said. “We’ll have to come to some sort of agreement, because otherwise it’s no good to us. We have paddocks here and stables and stuff, which is not across the way [in the new development]. It’s a beautiful project and we’re happy with the project, but there’s no room for the livestock.
“That’s what’s holding us up at the moment. They want us to drop our culture and throw it aside. It’s a very, very hard thing for us to do. It’s in our life, we’re going back centuries.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/families-want-stables-for-horses-before-moving-into-new-homes-1.3655385

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Tipp LA approached them. They say they are happy where they are, they have lived there for 50yrs apparently.

Confusing mess of a story, I know, but them is the facts of it.

the families have been living on an "unauthorised" site across the road for decades and are refusing to move pending the provision of horse accommodation.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/horse-has-bolted-council-will-not-provide-stables-for-1-7m-traveller-homes-in-local-standoff-37398684.html

Get the sneaking suspicion Francie may be a bit like me, and likes the drama of the proper general elections and all that craic and is just firmly pitching up his own camp to get a bit of craic from this minor enough election, amirite Francie? Ima right aren't I? lol

buried wrote: »

Get the sneaking suspicion Francie may be a bit like me, and likes the drama of the proper general elections and all that craic and is just firmly pitching up his own camp to get a bit of craic from this minor enough election, amirite Francie? Ima right aren't I? lol

I love elections, yes.
I also love a good debate.

hawkelady wrote: »

God , I can’t wait for this whole thing to be over, mainly so you can stop posting here francie. Are you being paid for the crap you spout .. it’s nauseating tbh. 98% of the guys and lassies in this thread think so .. funnily enough , the same percentage of unemployed travellers !! Go figure

Check out the Barry mcElduff thread hawk, if you really want to go over the top.

I won’t post a link in case you ...erm... take very serious steps toward the river.

I'll now be giving Casey my #2. Not because I agree with his remarks, but to make a stand against the ongoing paradigm that people should have to moderate their opinions before speaking them, or be punished in some way. F*ck that.

The people should be able to vote against this guy if they don't agree with what he has to say. The attempts to hound him out of the race prematurely, thus denying people the opportunity to vote on his ideology, are undemocratic in the extreme - and ironically, someone who strongly disagrees with his opinion will now be giving him a high voting preference purely because in that voter's opinion, freedom of expression is more important than any of the actual issues around his comments.

I've said it before, and I'll say it ad nauseum - the SJW brigade run the very real risk of losing elections (and in my view have already done so to some extent, see Trump and Brexit) purely because their dirty tactics piss people off enough to vote against them out of spite. I've never done that before but I will be doing so this time - the idea that anyone should withdraw from an election because they've said something objectionable, rather than merely being allowed to say it and see if people choose to vote against them as a result, is utterly abhorrent. The tearing down and vandalism of opposition posters during the marriage and repeal referenda, as well as the even more insidious tactic of threatening boycotts of venues which host meetings and events by the opposition, are part of the same trend of harassing certain political opinions into silence. And I personally know people who voted against marriage equality because "vote yes or else you're a scumbag" style campaigning pissed them off enough to do so even though they initially supported the proposal.

Absolutely appalling in my view.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Brendy; the man that loves an echo chamber.

I make no apology to you or anyone else for having an opinion. So you can trot on with your insinuation and attempted deflection. Contribute to the topic don't snipe from the sidelines. Pathetic.

And none expected Francie,none at all, you rare fighting a rearguard action here,and in fairness, if screen time was the criterium, doing a top job.

I was replying to a contributors post, Francie, and felt concerned she might stumble on the Kingsmill loaf thread and go over the top.

Now that’s the last time I will mention that, you are correct to call me out on that.




Group hug.......?

Muah. Muah muah....

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'll now be giving Casey my #2. Not because I agree with his remarks, but to make a stand against the ongoing paradigm that people should have to moderate their opinions before speaking them, or be punished in some way. F*ck that.

The people should be able to vote against this guy if they don't agree with what he has to say. The attempts to hound him out of the race prematurely, thus denying people the opportunity to vote on his ideology, are undemocratic in the extreme - and ironically, someone who strongly disagrees with his opinion will now be giving him a high voting preference purely because in that voter's opinion, freedom of expression is more important than any of the actual issues around his comments.

I've said it before, and I'll say it ad nauseum - the SJW brigade run the very real risk of losing elections (and in my view have already done so to some extent, see Trump and Brexit) purely because their dirty tactics piss people off enough to vote against them out of spite. I've never done that before but I will be doing so this time - the idea that anyone should withdraw from an election because they've said something objectionable, rather than merely being allowed to say it and see if people choose to vote against them as a result, is utterly abhorrent. The tearing down and vandalism of opposition posters during the marriage and repeal referenda, as well as the even more insidious tactic of threatening boycotts of venues which host meetings and events by the opposition, are part of the same trend of harassing certain political opinions into silence. And I personally know people who voted against marriage equality because "vote yes or else you're a scumbag" style campaigning pissed them off enough to do so even though they initially supported the proposal.

Absolutely appalling in my view.

Give him number one pls.

Jackman25 wrote: »

Casey wouldn't incite a cat down off a tree in fairness. He is a poor speaker, blundering and doddery and has a poor command of his facts.
This isn't some inspirational orator or Machiavellian character or charismatic leader brainwashing people, turning them against each other, creating hatred where none existed before.
Quite simply as Matt Cooper (tosser that he is) said, he shone a light where the establishment would rather one wasn't shone and he awoke in a lot of people feelings that they already had, but had no way of giving a voice to.
Hopefully tomorrow that voice will shout loudly. #CaseyNo1.

The man has been caught being 'constructive' with the truth several times.
Boris Johnson likes to cultivate the buffoon image and a lot of smart people (as well as ineffably stupid ones) bought that too.

Anyway, I am off out to canvass for a Yes to the Blasphemy ref vote. The bridge is yours...for a few hours

It was very funny watching the rest of the candidates at the first debate, all of them answering the question of "would you want a community of travellers living at the side of the road next to your gaff" to shoddy nods of the head whimpering 'yep.....yep I would like that" lol All them hoors wouldn't even want the likes of me living next door to them in a mansion if I won the lotto. That's where they all funked up bigtime