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

tayto lover · 31-01-2019 10:34PM

Goldengirl wrote: »

Ranting and railing against one distinct ethnic group , as on this thread, is considered Racist , by most of the civilised world , and is not a matter of opinion.

Bull****.
Ranting and raving about an ethnic community that is robbing the country blind and who offer nothing of any value to it. Quite acceptable and not one iota racist.

31-01-2019 10:38PM

Goldengirl wrote: »

Well done , big words.

Well I was told by your good self that I hadn't got it in me to argue a point so I provided one in proper terminology and then also in layman's terms. Everybody is happy then. Just in case anyone missed it, the big word I used means they f*ck their own cousins.

Paddy Cow · 31-01-2019 11:05PM

Goldengirl wrote: »

The Maoris are New Zealand 's ethnic group. Do they have a history of oppressing a minority. How do you not know this?

Maoris existed in New Zealand for hundreds of years before the British went over. There is no comparison between Maoris and Travellers. Travellers don't know where they came from. The accepted view is that they are a splinter group of native Irish who were displaced from the North in the 1600's. They lived a nomadic life and kept to themselves. They were self sufficient and got by, by doing seasonal farm work and mending pots and pans, hence the name "tinkers".

It's a recent trend that they have become completely depend on the welfare state to live. 100 years ago they were self sufficient and lived in caravans with no running water or electricity. Now we have third and fourth generation "Travellers" living in houses who consider themselves "settled Travellers" but still a different ethnic group. Nonsense. The only reason they are genetically different to regular Irish people is that for 400 years they have been marrying first cousins. That's not a good thing or something that should be encouraged because of "culture".

Paddy Cow · 31-01-2019 11:09PM

Goldengirl wrote: »

Just showing what it's like when your post is taken out of context.
I don't agree with all of what she says, the Stardust is not a comparison. Grenfell is.

No it's not. As I told you before, Grenfell happened because of faulty wiring and flammable cladding. It was not because adults in charge of children got drunk and forgot to turn off the chip pan.

It boggles my mind that people can be this obtuse. I don't know if you are deliberately trolling this thread or just looking for the rise but you are one of the worst "defenders" of travellers on this thread. I'll leave it at that, as I don't want to get banned.

The Satanist · 31-01-2019 11:25PM

Paddy Cow wrote: »

Maoris existed in New Zealand for hundreds of years before the British went over. There is no comparison between Maoris and Travellers. Travellers don't know where they came from. The accepted view is that they are a splinter group of native Irish who were displaced from the North in the 1600's. They lived a nomadic life and kept to themselves. They were self sufficient and got by, by doing seasonal farm work and mending pots and pans, hence the name "tinkers".

It's a recent trend that they have become completely depend on the welfare state to live. 100 years ago they were self sufficient and lived in caravans with no running water or electricity. Now we have third and fourth generation "Travellers" living in houses who consider themselves "settled Travellers" but still a different ethnic group. Nonsense. The only reason they are genetically different to regular Irish people is that for 400 years they have been marrying first cousins. That's not a good thing or something that should be encouraged because of "culture".

I remember back in the eighties, they'd call around the doors asking for old clothes and a tin of beans. We'd usually oblige too, throw in 50p or a pound if we could. "I'll say a prayer for you, ma'am", and they'd be on their way. If you needed a car part you'd go over to the tinkers in Finglas, near where Dunsink dump used up be. There was never the crime, welfare, feuds that is all they are known for now.

normanoffside · 31-01-2019 11:36PM

So apparently the YouTube show she is a guest on is out on Sunday. Presenter Bernard Sweeney thinks Mags is a natural and will soon have her own show.

Should be interesting.

tuxy · 31-01-2019 11:48PM

I had suspected that it was Bernard Sweeney writing her facebook posts that were not in text speak.
It will be a very one sided discussion, needless to say the conclusion will be that Leo is not only robbing her blind but also trying to murder travellers.

Tiguan Joe · 31-01-2019 11:54PM

BUMP

The Satanist · 31-01-2019 11:57PM

Sweeney is a socialist and community activist whose campaign promotes an anti-austerity message and Travellers' rights

facepalm/rolleyes mega-combo

tuxy · 01-02-2019 12:01AM

So travellers are socialist? That explains why it's not my heating oil in the tank beside my house, it's our heating oil

The Satanist · 01-02-2019 12:04AM

tuxy wrote: »

So travellers are socialist? That explains why it's not my heating oil in the tank beside my house, it's our heating oil

I think it's safe to say they are in favour of the welfare state.

Gimme A Pound · 01-02-2019 12:11AM

Paddy Cow wrote: »

It boggles my mind that people can be this obtuse. I don't know if you are deliberately trolling this thread or just looking for the rise but you are one of the worst "defenders" of travellers on this thread.

Absolutely. What sort of weird thrill do these people get by downplaying and misrepresenting the indefensible.

normanoffside · 01-02-2019 12:23AM

tuxy wrote: »

So travellers are socialist? That explains why it's not my heating oil in the tank beside my house, it's our heating oil

He probably wears a a Che Guevara shirt, not realising that Guevara would have locked him up and Chopped Maggies hands off.

Thoie · 01-02-2019 08:26AM

Goldengirl wrote: »

I addressed that as I will again . That is not an excuse, no matter how difficult.

Are you saying that if the council have provided an environment meeting all fire safety regulations, then the residents deliberately do something that negates all the fire safety, it's the council's fault?

If I remove the air bags from my car and don't wear a seat belt, then drive into a wall, is that the car manufacturer's fault?

Plumbthedepths · 01-02-2019 08:29AM

Thoie wrote:

If I remove the air bags from my car and don't wear a seat belt, then drive into a wall, is that the car manufacturer's fault?

Only if you are a traveller, if not it's your own fault.

01-02-2019 08:55AM

Thoie wrote: »

Are you saying that if the council have provided an environment meeting all fire safety regulations, then the residents deliberately do something that negates all the fire safety, it's the council's fault?

If I remove the air bags from my car and don't wear a seat belt, then drive into a wall, is that the car manufacturer's fault?

No, silly. It’s the councils fault for putting the wall there!

BattleCorp · 01-02-2019 09:06AM

Goldengirl wrote: »

Anyone can see that this thread uses M.Cash to rant and rail against travellers , who are a distinct ethnic group , whether ye choose to accept that or not, and that is racism. .

Even if they are a distinct ethnic group (which I don't agree with,), it isn't racist to point out the sizeable criminal and anti-social goings-on in their community.

I'm guessing that you've never had to put up with their sh1t or had stuff pilfered by them or else you wouldn't be defending them to the hilt.

Seriously though, do you not see something wrong with one section of the community going take, take, take and making things sh1t for everyone else?

And yes, I know lots of settled people act in a similar behaviour too and I'm equally p1ssed off with them too.

I'll leave you with these two points.

1. If there is no endemic problem of criminality and anti-social behaviour in the traveller community, what explanation can you give for the much much higher percentage of traveller adults in jail when compared to the numbers of the settled community in jail?

2. How is it racist to point out criminality and anti-social behaviour where it occurs.

sexmag · 01-02-2019 09:43AM

BattleCorp wrote: »

Even if they are a distinct ethnic group (which I don't agree with,), it isn't racist to point out the sizeable criminal and anti-social goings-on in their community.

I'm guessing that you've never had to put up with their sh1t or had stuff pilfered by them or else you wouldn't be defending them to the hilt.

Seriously though, do you not see something wrong with one section of the community going take, take, take and making things sh1t for everyone else?

And yes, I know lots of settled people act in a similar behaviour too and I'm equally p1ssed off with them too.

I'll leave you with these two points.

1. If there is no endemic problem of criminality and anti-social behaviour in the traveller community, what explanation can you give for the much much higher percentage of traveller adults in jail when compared to the numbers of the settled community in jail?

2. How is it racist to point out criminality and anti-social behaviour where it occurs.

Also it's not hate or racist to point these things out.

What would be racist or hate is if people started saying "I f**king hate travellers, I wish they would die,im going to hurt them etc"

We are not and I for one actually wouldn't condone that behaviour and would actively discourage it,regardless of how I feel about travellers.

To point out an ethinc groups statistically proven facts is not racist dispite how unbecoming they are for that group

01-02-2019 09:47AM

Thoie wrote: »

Are you saying that if the council have provided an environment meeting all fire safety regulations, then the residents deliberately do something that negates all the fire safety, it's the council's fault?

If I remove the air bags from my car and don't wear a seat belt, then drive into a wall, is that the car manufacturer's fault?

Not only would it be their fault, it would be racist too.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b · 01-02-2019 09:54AM

Goldengirl wrote: »

The Maoris are New Zealand 's ethnic group.

You're actually comparing the Māori to Travellers?

The Māori migrated from Polynesia in the 13th century. Many European migrants, of mostly British and Irish origin, arrived in the 19th century and now make up three-quarters of the population. Today, the Māori are clearly an ethnic minority.

But Travellers don't come from anywhere else. They are as Irish as the rest of us. Scientific tests show that the minor genetic differences between Travellers and settled Irish people stems from the Traveller tradition of consanguineous marriage (i.e., marrying their cousins) over the past 150-odd years.

People don't transform into a different ethnicity by sleeping with their cousins. Travellers' recognition as an ethnic minority was done to appease lobby groups like Pavee Point, rather than because there's any objective basis for it.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b · 01-02-2019 09:59AM

Thoie wrote: »

If I remove the air bags from my car and don't wear a seat belt, then drive into a wall, is that the car manufacturer's fault?

No, no, no, you're doing it all wrong.

Remove the airbags from your car, don't wear a seat belt, slam on your brakes in traffic to trigger a rear-end collision, and then $$$$$$$$.

KrustyUCC · 01-02-2019 10:02AM

Also make sure to have as many family members as possible in the car at the time as well

More $$$$$$$$.

Gravelly · 01-02-2019 10:10AM

Rex Tasteless Gutter wrote: »

No, no, no, you're doing it all wrong.

Remove the airbags from your car, don't wear a seat belt, slam on your brakes in traffic to trigger a rear-end collision, and then $$$$$$$$.

I've a friend who's a guard in a town well known for its traveller population. He attended a "crash" there recently in which a taxi with 3 travellers in it was rear-ended by another car. The car which rear-ended it barely touched the bumper - leaving no mark whatsoever - the other car drove off immediately. The taxi driver wasn't even going to stop, until all three travellers began screaming in pain. They insisted the emergency services were called, and when they arrived, claimed they all had neck injuries and insisted the fire brigade cut the roof off the car to remove them. Once the roof was cut off and neck collars attached to the "patients" they happily got out of the car, removed the collars and walked to the ambulance. The taxi driver told my friend that one of them had been on her phone giving their exact location to someone else just before the "crash" which of course was their accomplice in the car that tipped them.

Apparently this has become a regular thing now, with travellers having "accidents" in taxi's, and insisting that they have neck collars or spine boards fitted (requiring the destruction of the car and hours of fire brigade and ambulance time) so that their "injuries" are more serious.

KrustyUCC · 01-02-2019 10:13AM

Great to have every angle covered ...

Plumbthedepths · 01-02-2019 10:16AM

Gravelly wrote:

Apparently this has become a regular thing now, with travellers having "accidents" in taxi's, and insisting that they have neck collars or spine boards fitted (requiring the destruction of the car and hours of fire brigade and ambulance time) so that their "injuries" are more serious.

Unfortunately for the 'thickos' in the travelling community that engage in this activity they are challenged by the insurance companies in court. Hopefully a move towards imposing costs on spurious claims becomes automatic.

Gravelly · 01-02-2019 10:22AM

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Unfortunately for the 'thickos' in the travelling community that engage in this activity they are challenged by the insurance companies in court. Hopefully a move towards imposing costs on spurious claims becomes automatic.

Apparently this new scam is an attempt to get around the challenges - presumably by having "evidence" that they required a neck collar / spine board after their "accident" to back up the unprovable back/neck pain that they claim for.

sligojoek · 01-02-2019 10:23AM

Gravelly wrote: »

I've a friend who's a guard in a town well known for its traveller population. He attended a "crash" there recently in which a taxi with 3 travellers in it was rear-ended by another car. The car which rear-ended it barely touched the bumper - leaving no mark whatsoever - the other car drove off immediately. The taxi driver wasn't even going to stop, until all three travellers began screaming in pain. They insisted the emergency services were called, and when they arrived, claimed they all had neck injuries and insisted the fire brigade cut the roof off the car to remove them. Once the roof was cut off and neck collars attached to the "patients" they happily got out of the car, removed the collars and walked to the ambulance. The taxi driver told my friend that one of them had been on her phone giving their exact location to someone else just before the "crash" which of course was their accomplice in the car that tipped them.

Apparently this has become a regular thing now, with travellers having "accidents" in taxi's, and insisting that they have neck collars or spine boards fitted (requiring the destruction of the car and hours of fire brigade and ambulance time) so that their "injuries" are more serious.

That carry on was going on in Nenagh 20 yrs ago. It came to the stage no taxi would take a fare from Carthy's Cross halting site. "Sorry love. I'm busy for the next three hours". It would do the fat f*cks no harm to walk the 2km into town anyway.

Gravelly · 01-02-2019 10:26AM

sligojoek wrote: »

That carry on was going on in Nenagh 20 yrs ago. It came to the stage no taxi would take a fare from Carthy's Cross halting site. "Sorry love. I'm busy for the next three hours". It would do the fat f*cks no harm to walk the 2km into town anyway.

Was it? I'd never heard of it before - or at least the insistence on neck collars and spine boards part anyay.

Plumbthedepths · 01-02-2019 10:28AM

Someone needs to break it to the idiots that the insurance companies are wise to their scams, hence why the spate of recent traveller related claims for soft tissue injuries have been thrown out of court.

BattleCorp · 01-02-2019 10:28AM

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Unfortunately for the 'thickos' in the travelling community that engage in this activity they are challenged by the insurance companies in court. Hopefully a move towards imposing costs on spurious claims becomes automatic.

I deal with personal injury claims for a good percentage of my working week and I can assure you that only a small percentage of these spurious claims are 'thrown out of court'.

All that happens when they get caught out for exaggerating their injuries is that they get up and walk away - scott free.

And even if costs were awarded against them, they wouldn't pay.

Unless there is an unbelievable overhaul of the system, there won't be a significant change in this behaviour.

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

Comments