Rex Tasteless Gutter wrote: » I wonder how the left-liberals who blindly defend Travellers no matter what make their peace with supporting someone who champions the IRA, supports hard-right anti-immigration groups, wishes a painful death to a gay half-Indian Taoiseach, has 39 criminal convictions under her belt by the age of 28, and whose husband recently spent time in prison for assaulting the elderly. Margaret Cash's history and statements show that she is a racist, a nationalist, a homophobe, and a convicted criminal. But it's the people criticizing her who are labeled racists. Go figure.
KrustyUCC wrote: » Margaret shared the following article The Irish Times view on the Carrickmines deaths: the State must stand with Travellershttps://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/editorial/the-irish-times-view-on-the-carrickmines-deaths-the-state-must-stand-with-travellers-1.3770799 "Its source was a chip-pan left on an electric ring switched to the highest setting." Funny how there is no mention of alcohol or drugs in relation to the chip pan fire Also no mention of the feud which meant the family moved in the first place " Party members who play the anti-Traveller, racist card in local politics must be sanctioned by their parties. Communities intent on stymying safe, secure accommodation for Travellers must be faced down. Only when this happens can Government claim to be serious about addressing the chronic discrimination faced by Travellers. " This type of crap is exactly why the media was so anti Peter Casey
Rex Tasteless Gutter wrote: » Plenty of people have been fooled into believing that Travellers are a harmless minority group whose traditions and culture greatly enrich the Irish nation. They believe that Travellers' social and economic problems stem from settled people's appalling history of intolerance and racism, and believe that settled people should now respect Travellers' separate ethnic identity and keep handing them all the houses, stables, cash and entitlements they want. I'd personally find it easier to believe in astrology than to believe the prevailing left-liberal groupthink about Travellers.
mcmoustache wrote: » The left-liberal attitude to travellers is mostly confined to students and people who don't have many interactions with travellers. It's a minority viewpoint as this and other threads on travellers will show. I'm from the countryside and my opinions on travellers would be more extreme than what Casey expressed. I'm very familiar with the burglary, the scrounging, the dumping and the inability to behave in polite society. Where I have an issue is with a Dragon's Den millionaire presidential candidate cynically using people's dislike of travellers to get votes and distract from the fact that he had nothing else going for him. It's a con. If this was a councillor like Michael Cahill who actually had good reason to complain about travellers as part of his role in local politics, I would applaud him but I see right through a reality tv star with no public service behind him exploiting my dislike of tinkers.
KrustyUCC wrote: » " Party members who play the anti-Traveller, racist card in local politics must be sanctioned by their parties. Communities intent on stymying safe, secure accommodation for Travellers must be faced down.
CrankyHaus wrote: » Surprised she didn't post this :https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/opinion-temporary-halting-sites-are-unsafe-and-there-have-been-three-more-fires-since-carrickmines-4462852-Jan2019/ Spin doctor for Irish Traveller Movement criticises media for reporting on what caused the Carrickmines fire, hints at racist angle. The top comments are actually good rebuttals.
mcmoustache wrote: » The left-liberal attitude to travellers is mostly confined to students and people who don't have many interactions with travellers. It's a minority viewpoint as this and other threads on travellers will show. I'm from the countryside and my opinions on travellers would be more extreme than what Casey expressed. I'm very familiar with the burglary, the scrounging, the dumping and the inability to behave in polite society.
Rex Tasteless Gutter wrote: » It might be a minority viewpoint but it's also a hugely influential one, since it's the stance adopted by RTE, most of the rest of the media, and the political and academic establishment. It's literally the only viewpoint we ever get to hear -- which is why Casey, whatever you might think of him, was a breath of fresh air. For a few moments, we got a small dose of reality.
Odelay wrote: » I wonder would they be as forgiving if she was a he??
BBFAN wrote: » You see this is what I don't get really. I condemn her waster of a husband much more than this woman. He's nothing but a scumbag and clearly doesn't feed, clothe or in any way contribute to the bringing up of these 7 kids and yet barely a mention here???? She's the biggest cnut going but no mention whatsoever of his lack of contribution?
KrustyUCC wrote: » Yeah lovely spin from her "There were days during the inquest that the alcohol levels of the deceased adults, who were said to have had between four and six drinks each, were subject to media reporting, often without sensitivity. I can’t recall another fire tragedy, the Stardust among them, where the media reports focused on the alcohol levels of the victims. A chip pan was identified as the cause of the fire and some media outlets also reported on which adult had eaten chips that night. That was repeated on the broadcast news bulletins throughout that night and it must have been difficult for the family to hear it again and again. I thought the reporting was insensitive and inappropriate." She doesn't mention the drug use either As if alcohol and drug use and a chip pan couldn't be the logical reason why the fire started
punisher5112 wrote: » But then the same is on her she hasn't done a thing so they are both the same. What a fcuk up of a family who are here for generations to come and to drain from society and the social. They will terrorise for years to come too.
BBFAN wrote: » It is a fair point though, did anyone try to place blame on the Stardust victims for being drunk which they most probably were given they were in a nightclub?
BBFAN wrote: » It's not true to say she hasn't done a thing. If she hadn't done a thing the children wouldn't be alive. Come on now, you're saying she hasn't done more than their father to ensure they are at least alive?
punisher5112 wrote: » Oh dear lord jebus
BBFAN wrote: » Fine rebuttal there. :rolleyes:
BBFAN wrote: It is a fair point though, did anyone try to place blame on the Stardust victims for being drunk which they most probably were given they were in a nightclub?
Plumbthedepths wrote: » BBFAN wrote: It is a fair point though, did anyone try to place blame on the Stardust victims for being drunk which they most probably were given they were in a nightclub? It's not a fair point. The fire exits in the Stardust were chained shut. Plus the Stardust victims didn't have the added responsibility of minding children on the night they died. Sickening comparison tbh but I would expect nothing less from the enablers of these people's behaviour.
DavidLyons_ wrote: Holy fcuk!! I have that poster blocked (and with very good reason) so only see their posts when they’re quoted.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » DavidLyons_ wrote: Holy fcuk!! I have that poster blocked (and with very good reason) so only see their posts when they’re quoted. Sorry about that... It does demonstrate what type of repugnant individuals leap to the defence of the indefensible.
Johnny Jukebox wrote: » Party members who don't play the anti-Traveller card won't get re-elected, particularly in South County Dublin. Very few people will vote for a politician who is trying to increase the number of travellers in their area. That's the reality, irrespective of the party spin.
DavidLyons_ wrote: » Holy fcuk!! I have that poster blocked (and with very good reason) so only see their posts when they’re quoted. That is an utterly repugnant comparison to make. Absolutely disgusting. Sadly, I would expect nothing less from such a person though.
deaddonkey15 wrote: » I'm in the exact same boat as you. It was one of the stupidest things I've seen written on this site.
NIMAN wrote: » Is there any penalties against people making fraudulent claims?
