Margaret Cash steals €300 worth of clothes from Penneys and aftermath/etc!

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

there has been nothing defamatory.

If casting people, by their name, in a bad light for their entire life isn't defamatory then I don't know what is. Would a thread about Denis O'Brien be allowed here like this?

Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: »

News flash honey, pointing out stealing is wrong, having kids you can’t afford is irresponsible and the only time someone should expect a forever house is when they buy one isn’t mysogynstic. It’s common sense.
Margaret and her foghorn mouth made herself the poster child for the perpetually entitled, she made outlandish claims that the state, ie, us, the people, are ROBBING her and aren’t working hard enough to supply her with even more of her lifestyle. Bear in mind she has never earned one euro of her own money.

Is it misogynistic of her, to deny women like me the chance to have a large family? I mean if it didn’t cost us all so much paying for her and everyone like her, then the rest of us could afford more than one or two kids.

So you're jealous of her....honey? Then just do the same if you think it's so easy and comfortable a lifestyle, after all, it's a free country, no one stopped her, so they won't stop you, honey. You sound like an idiot with your honeys, honey.

elperello

Gravelly wrote: »

Riiiiiiight

Correct and right.
I'm not dredging up examples of others filth and repeating it.

ShaneC93

retro:electro wrote: »

I’m gonna call bs on most of her spelling errors. Some of them seem so deliberately done. I’ve seen the score before. Pretend they can’t read to avoid letters summonsing them to court but have no problem scrolling through the Sky channels on their HD box informing you of what’s on the box later

She does seem to do it somewhat deliberately. Like there was one lately when she switched 'famine' to 'famming', a longer word to write and not exactly a normal 'txt speak' word. Plus there was one long post from her at one stage in which she used near-perfect English.. Not sure why you'd pretend you can't spell properly. Maybe to fit in with some of her friends who legit can't.

Gravelly

elperello wrote: »

Correct and right.
I'm not dredging up examples of others filth and repeating it.

That imaginary, invisible "filth" no one can see?

ohnonotgmail

Babooshka wrote: »

If casting people, by their name, in a bad light for their entire life isn't defamatory then I don't know what is. Would a thread about Denis O'Brien be allowed here like this?

the truth is a defence to defamation.

Babooshka wrote: »

If casting people, by their name, in a bad light for their entire life isn't defamatory then I don't know what is. Would a thread about Denis O'Brien be allowed here like this?

But it’s true? She does have 39 convictions. She did rob and steal. She is standing with her begging hand out looking for more, while doing nothing to help herself. She does feel entitled to be handed a house in Tallaght, while thousands of people commute to Dublin daily to work, not being able to afford an address in the capital. She put six children (dressed in a school uniform in August might I remind you) to sleep on a garda bench so their photos could be used in the paper.
It’s not discrimination to not want to pay for her anymore. It’s not discrimination to point out how she’s behaving when she’s made herself a public figure.

Babooshka wrote: »

If casting people, by their name, in a bad light for their entire life isn't defamatory then I don't know what is.

The definition of defamation: presenting an individual or group or organisation via false information and in such a way that lowers their reputation in the eyes of right-thinking people.

Nobody did it but her, it is not false, and she is happy to post her bile and hypocrisy on social media day in day out.

ShaneC93 wrote: »

Margaret, is that you?

For something to be defamation it has to be making knowingly false claims against someone. I haven't seem anyone doing that here.

No I am not Margaret Cash, I just don't like seeing anybody booted around social media sites, anyone, for all and sundry to beat with sticks as something to do because they have nothing better to do, and I see how they all pounce like a bunch of baying wild dogs when someone tries to call a halt to it. If it was someone in power they would bring the site down with threats of legal action. But because it's a woman who is on social welfare it's ok, cos like, she's taking our money. (honey)

Babooshka wrote: »

So you're jealous of her....honey? Then just do the same if you think it's so easy and comfortable a lifestyle, after all, it's a free country, no one stopped her, so they won't stop you, honey. You sound like an idiot with your honeys, honey.

Yes I’m jealous. I’m jealous I don’t have a football team of kids.
Or, here’s a novel idea. If she thinks it’s so great not relying on social assistance she could always, shock horror, get a job and pay her own way in life like the rest of us?

tretorn

Babooshka wrote: »

So you're jealous of her....honey? Then just do the same if you think it's so easy and comfortable a lifestyle, after all, it's a free country, no one stopped her, so they won't stop you, honey. You sound like an idiot with your honeys, honey.

Shoeschild has been brought up by parents who taught her self respect, thats the one stumbling block she has to stop her giving up her job and having a child every nine months. Shoes parents also taught her not to steal, they think people should work to earn money.

The problem also if shoes and the rest of us throw the jobs over to live off the State whose taxes is going to fund Margaret, her children, Grandchildren and Great Grandchildren, Margaret will start having great grandchildren in her fifties and if she lives until shes seventy thats another forty years of handouts funded by Shoes.

freshpopcorn

Babooshka wrote: »

Can someone with some sense please delete this thread, just why is a thread with this woman's name on it allowed to remain here day in day out, totally unfair and surely not within the laws of defamation.

She put herself in the limelight and has continued to pop up since from her Claire Byrne incident, to husband to her Penney's incident and she continues to post on social media.
So, if there's an interest and things don't get to out of hand. I don't see an issue with the thread!

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the truth is a defence to defamation.

Ha...tell Denis O'Brien that and he'd laugh in your face, the truth is what you twist it into and the courts are there to protect the rich not the honest or the "low lifes" that you're all so happy to dance all over. I'm out of here, it smells - very bad. Shame on you all.

Gravelly

Babooshka wrote: »

Shame on you all.

Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: »

I’ve always wanted a vagina like a yawning hippo.
?

You've got a mouth like one instead. Yawn, Bye bye, to you on high, enjoy it up there from the tip of your nose down your keyboard, it's probably the only place you get to lord it over anyone. I'd rather be stuck in a lift with Margaret than any of you lot.

Gravelly wrote: »

WINTER IS A COMING

Babooshka wrote: »

You've got a mouth like one instead. Yawn, Bye bye, to you on high, enjoy it up there from the tip of your nose down your keyboard, it's probably the only place you get to lord it over anyone. I'd rather be stuck in a lift with Margaret than any of you lot.

Honey I’ve actually typed that. Stop defaming me. It’s my fingers not my mouth.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Babooshka wrote: »

If casting people, by their name, in a bad light for their entire life isn't defamatory then I don't know what is.

People are commenting on the pictures and statements that Margaret Cash has put into the public sphere, as well as the interviews and speeches that she has given.

She put herself in the media with PR stunts designed to get herself a free house. She was the poster girl for several left-wing parties for about 48 hours, before they found out about her and her husband's criminal history and shied away. If everybody in the country now knows her name and reputation, that's hardly the fault of this thread. She has brought it upon herself.

maccored

great to see a thread like this making so many feel good about themselves. well done. ye's are obviously all fantastically lovely people (with a penchant for gossiping and whinging about people, on the internet)

Rex Tasteless Gutter wrote: »

People are commenting on the pictures and statements that Margaret Cash has put into the public sphere, as well as the interviews and speeches that she has given.

She put herself in the media with PR stunts designed to get herself a free house. She was the poster girl for several left-wing parties for about 48 hours, before they found out about her and her husband's criminal history and shied away. If everybody in the country now knows her name and reputation, that's hardly the fault of this thread. She has brought it upon herself.

She's only a c&nt....so it's ok for us to be c&ntier.....yes I see your logic there. Enjoy your life c&nting it over everyone.

freshpopcorn

Babooshka wrote: »

She's only a c&nt....so it's ok for us to be c&ntier.....yes I see your logic there. Enjoy your life c&nting it over everyone.

Do you under the the concept of this thread or the forums in general?
It's to allow people to discuss various topic and have there say in them.

Babooshka wrote: »

No I am not Margaret Cash, I just don't like seeing anybody booted around social media sites, anyone, for all and sundry to beat with sticks as something to do because they have nothing better to do, and I see how they all pounce like a bunch of baying wild dogs when someone tries to call a halt to it. If it was someone in power they would bring the site down with threats of legal action. But because it's a woman who is on social welfare it's ok, cos like, she's taking our money. (honey)

It's not just because she's a woman - a man with no personal responsibility and massive selfishness and self entitlement would receive the same reception. Social welfare is perfectly fine - but not when it's exploited to bits as she's doing? And any comment on her own odious behaviour?

Babooshka wrote: »

Ha...tell Denis O'Brien that and he'd laugh in your face, the truth is what you twist it into and the courts are there to protect the rich not the honest or the "low lifes" that you're all so happy to dance all over. I'm out of here, it smells - very bad. Shame on you all.

What's to be ashamed of? You must not have read about her behaviour if you're so keen to depict her as an innocent misunderstood victim. You'd need to cling for dear life to your handbag in that lift by the way.

She's the one who keeps putting herself in the spotlight - "da govement r cuntts" etc despite all the state money she gets for nothing.

Can you think of anyone else besides Denis O'Brien ffs? He's beyond an exception. What about just ordinary people who work full-time with a small family yet still struggle and will never have someone dashing around to find a specific type of home for them?

Deluded reverse snobs really crack me up.

maccored wrote: »

great to see a thread like this making so many feel good about themselves. well done. ye's are obviously all fantastically lovely people (with a penchant for gossiping and whinging about people, on the internet)

Thanks. Better than Cash's odious behaviour.

Babooshka wrote: »

She's only a c&nt....so it's ok for us to be c&ntier.....yes I see your logic there. Enjoy your life c&nting it over everyone.

Where did Vox say she's a cuntt?

[Deleted User]

ShaneC93 wrote: »

Your spending choices say otherwise Margaret.. Would hardly be spending €80 on some dodgy Facebook lottery tickets for a 7% chance of winning 4 gypsy bride doll ornaments only a couple of days back if you're barely making ends meet.

She’s €100 out. Should be getting €420 a week plus €980 a month children’s allowance

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Babooshka wrote: »

She's only a c&nt....so it's ok for us to be c&ntier.....yes I see your logic there. Enjoy your life c&nting it over everyone.

I've never called Margaret Cash or anyone else a c*nt.

In fact, I've even said earlier in the thread that I feel sorry for her. She is a classic product of a dysfunctional culture that takes girls out of school at an early age and marries them off while still in their teens, so that they wind up as illiterate child brides and baby factories.

It's not necessarily her fault that she's uneducated and unemployable, with her 7 kids in all probability headed down the same path. It's the fault of a culture that many tell us should be respected and protected.