Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Gemma O'Doherty and her unicorns

Options
1…2425272930…61

Comments

  • Options
    #782
    Blueshoe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Blueshoe


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    He's a gobshìte so it won't be long before he fùcks up and ends up back in front of a judge.

    Repeat offenders gonna repeat.

    Same with the groomers


  • Options
    #783
    Boxing.Fan
    Registered Users Posts: 452 ✭✭Boxing.Fan


    Blueshoe wrote: »
    Same with the groomers

    Timberrrr and the rest of the gang have shown time and time again that they are more interested seeing TR jailed than they are seeing paedos jailed. They certainly take more pleasure in seeing TR locked up than the paedos.

    Very odd.


  • Options
    #784
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,167 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Boxing.Fan wrote: »
    Timberrrr and the rest of the gang have shown time and time again that they are more interested seeing TR jailed than they are seeing paedos jailed. They certainly take more pleasure in seeing TR locked up than the paedos.

    Very odd.

    i dont suppose you have any actual evidence to support that slur?


  • Options
    #785
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,409 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Boxing.Fan wrote: »
    Timberrrr and the rest of the gang have shown time and time again that they are more interested seeing TR jailed than they are seeing paedos jailed. They certainly take more pleasure in seeing TR locked up than the paedos.

    Very odd.


    Sigh....

    TR had NOTHING to do with the grooming gangs getting caught/jailed....he did put their convictions at risk.with his stupid behaviour outside of the courts.

    If you and the other SYL fanboys cannot understand this then i won't waste anymore time trying to explain it to you, if you don't understand by now then you never will.


  • Options
    #786
    Boxing.Fan
    Registered Users Posts: 452 ✭✭Boxing.Fan


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    i dont suppose you have any actual evidence to support that slur?

    You can point me to where you were all as obsessed about seeing paedos locked as you are about Tommy?

    Yous dont care about the kids either, you are just happy to see him locked up.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #787
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,167 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Boxing.Fan wrote: »
    You can point me to where you were all as obsessed about seeing paedos locked as you are about Tommy?

    Yous dont care about the kids either, you are just happy to see him locked up.

    this is a thread about Gemma. I think you've got lost.


  • Options
    #788
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,732 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Boxing.Fan banned 1 week for personal abuse.


  • Options
    #789
    Infernal Racket
    Registered Users Posts: 1,418 ✭✭✭Infernal Racket


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Sigh....

    TR had NOTHING to do with the grooming gangs getting caught/jailed....he did put their convictions at risk.with his stupid behaviour outside of the courts.

    If you and the other SYL fanboys cannot understand this then i won't waste anymore time trying to explain it to you, if you don't understand by now then you never will.

    I'll never understand how people dont get this.


  • Options
    #790
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,732 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Several posts have been deleted for backseat moderation.


  • Options
    #791
    Harvey Weinstein
    Closed Accounts Posts: 536 ✭✭✭Harvey Weinstein


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Sigh....

    TR had NOTHING to do with the grooming gangs getting caught/jailed....he did put their convictions at risk.with his stupid behaviour outside of the courts.

    If you and the other SYL fanboys cannot understand this then i won't waste anymore time trying to explain it to you, if you don't understand by now then you never will.

    He had a big role in highlighting and putting a spotlight on the crimes of the Grooming gangs...when most of the media either ignored it or played down the severity of it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #792
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,409 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Harvey Weinstein wrote: »
    He had a big role in highlighting and putting a spotlight on the crimes of the Grooming gangs...when most of the media either ignored it or played down the severity of it.

    So we agree, SYL had nothing to do with exposing the grooming gangs, he just jumped on the bandwagon when the news broke.


  • Options
    #793
    Harvey Weinstein
    Closed Accounts Posts: 536 ✭✭✭Harvey Weinstein


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    So we agree, SYL had nothing to do with exposing the grooming gangs, he just jumped on the bandwagon when the news broke.

    Of course he had a huge role in exposing the gangs. That doesn't mean his work directly resulted in any particular gang being arrested. But he (along with others) brought it to the attention of the public, when the 'official' media largely ignored it. This was important.
    I remember an article in the Guardian back in the late 2000's (which I believed at the time) saying that the allegations about the gangs were based in "plain and simple racism" or something to that effect. TR\SYL was an important counterbalance to that kind of whitewashing.
    I don't really give a f*ck about the guy, his motives are suspicious and he's obviously being funded by someone..who?
    But he played an important part in bringing the crimes of these gangs to the attention of the public.


  • Options
    #794
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,732 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Love how they call it "no platforming" no one is stopping them from setting up their own site ans spouting their shìte, they are jusy upset because the ones that generate the most clicks (and revenue for them) don't allow them to spew whatever bile they like.

    They think a sites T&C's don't apply to them.

    It implies they can't source their own platform, when in reality someone just decided their platform is not for them.


  • Options
    #795
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,424 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    Good thing there's free speech platforms like Gab and Bitchute as an alternative form of social media. Also they're working on a platform that allows live streaming also.


    They don't want 'social media'. They want ad revenue and income. See how far they get without out.

    Blueshoe wrote: »
    Same with the groomers
    Boxing.Fan wrote: »
    Timberrrr and the rest of the gang have shown time and time again that they are more interested seeing TR jailed than they are seeing paedos jailed. They certainly take more pleasure in seeing TR locked up than the paedos.

    Very odd.
    Harvey Weinstein wrote: »
    He had a big role in highlighting and putting a spotlight on the crimes of the Grooming gangs...when most of the media either ignored it or played down the severity of it.


    Just bit of a shame that SYL has done nothing about the groomers on his own side. Perhaps dealing with groomers isn't a top priority after all, and is just a tactic to get the knuckle-draggers on his side?
    https://politicsandinsights.org/2018/05/29/the-edl-have-paedophiles-in-their-ranks-but-tommy-robinson-evidently-doesnt-condemn-them/


  • Options
    #796
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,493 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    THREATS, LIES, AND YOUTUBE LINKS: GEMMA O’DOHERTY AND THE FAR RIGHT


  • Options
    #797
    Dr. Bre
    Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭Dr. Bre


    Nice blue sky out today - no chemtrails Gemma !


  • Options
    #798
    alaimacerc
    Registered Users Posts: 7,224 ✭✭✭alaimacerc


    The Nal wrote: »
    THREATS, LIES, AND YOUTUBE LINKS: GEMMA O’DOHERTY AND THE FAR RIGHT

    Couple of Gemmonian-grade comments on that very article, I see. Not so much the bottom half of the internet, as the very worst percentile.


  • Options
    #799
    Infernal Racket
    Registered Users Posts: 1,418 ✭✭✭Infernal Racket


    Dr. Bre wrote: »
    Nice blue sky out today - no chemtrails Gemma !

    Pilots must have had a day off


  • Options
    #800
    Infernal Racket
    Registered Users Posts: 1,418 ✭✭✭Infernal Racket


    She is outside Google now after staging a major protest (3 people holding a banner) because Google suspended her channel. It's hilarious stuff. I'm thinking of heading down there with a small bucket of popcorn


  • Options
    #801
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,493 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Lads, the pic of her "supporters".

    This is performance art right?

    Right?!

    https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1151200917724782599?s=19


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #802
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,167 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    The Nal wrote: »
    Lads, the pic of her "supporters".

    This is performance art right?

    Right?!

    https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1151200917724782599?s=19

    Turner prize winning stuff


  • Options
    #803
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,493 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    https://twitter.com/PeterFl27318076/status/1151296627631689728?s=19


  • Options
    #804
    creeper1
    Registered Users Posts: 639 ✭✭✭creeper1


    I noticed that Gemma’s YouTube channels have been taken down because of “hate speech”

    Who the heck are YouTube to decide what is and what is not “hate speech”?

    I am angry about this.


  • Options
    #805
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,493 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    creeper1 wrote: »
    I noticed that Gemma’s YouTube channels have been taken down because of “hate speech”

    Who the heck are YouTube to decide what is and what is not “hate speech”?

    I am angry about this.

    They're a private company. They can ban who they like. She received warnings about breaking their Ts & Cs and kept doing it.

    She still has free speech. She get get a megaphone and go shouting her rubbish around the streets.

    Its all very funny though. Her running around D4 covering her face up to hide the salty tears.


  • Options
    #806
    Seanachai
    Registered Users Posts: 2,538 ✭✭✭Seanachai


    The Nal wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/PeterFl27318076/status/1151296627631689728?s=19

    "Anti Capitalist Front", so the Dublin wing of Antifa basically. I could see this escalating to her being assaulted soon.


  • Options
    #807
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,493 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Seanachai wrote: »
    "Anti Capitalist Front", so the Dublin wing of Antifa basically. I could see this escalating to her being assaulted soon.

    Doubt it. We're not going to be hearing from her as much anymore so why bother.

    Shes banned from youtube, permanently, and shes too much of a chicken shít to engage in a debate with anyone, on radio, online or on TV as she knows she would be torn apart.

    She has Twitter and Facebook I suppose but they'll ban her too if she continues. Facebook in particular seems to attract the highest percentage of thickos so she should focus on that from now on.


  • Options
    #808
    Thoie
    Registered Users Posts: 6,344 ✭✭✭Thoie


    creeper1 wrote: »
    I noticed that Gemma’s YouTube channels have been taken down because of “hate speech”

    Who the heck are YouTube to decide what is and what is not “hate speech”?

    I am angry about this.

    If a private company decides to ban all people with green eyes, or people who wear bootcut jeans, or people who wear glasses, they can.

    You have the right to free speech, but that doesn't mean you can burst into my sitting room to shout at me. It also doesn't mean I have to listen to you, or agree with you.


  • Options
    #809
    creeper1
    Registered Users Posts: 639 ✭✭✭creeper1


    That is not valid at all. She isn’t bursting into my living room. I am actively searching out her content because I want to listen to her views.

    Google and YouTube are so dominant they have near monopoly.


  • Options
    #810
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,167 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    creeper1 wrote: »
    That is not valid at all. She isn’t bursting into my living room. I am actively searching out her content because I want to listen to her views.

    Google and YouTube are so dominant they have near monopoly.

    If you want to listen to her views you can go stand outside google hq. I hear she is doing a summer season there.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #811
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    creeper1 wrote: »
    That is not valid at all. She isn’t bursting into my living room. I am actively searching out her content because I want to listen to her views.

    Google and YouTube are so dominant they have near monopoly.
    Still plenty of ways for her to host her own content. It will just cost her more and generate less revenue. But it's really about the message, so shouldnt be a bother to her, right?
    Why should youtube be forced to allow racists on their site?

    Also you probably shouldnt seek out her views as they are a bit stupid.


Advertisement