nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Gemma not taking enforced retirement too well

[Deleted User]

She's permanently on twitter now tweeting links to wacky stories from a few years ago and every single conspiracy theory she can get her hands on

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

batgoat

Blueshoe wrote: »

"Genuine racist propaganda" stop the lights

Pretty accurate if a person is claiming Irish people were historically true victims of racism.

recedite

Dytalus wrote: »

Indeed. This is not a failing of the Gardaí, so much as it is a failing of the legislature.

Ireland only has one piece of hate crime legislation: the Incitement to Hatred act, 1989. The act makes it illegal to create and distribute hateful material, designed to incite hatred of groups of people.

You'll note that our legislation doesn't actually make attacking someone based on their ethnicity/orientation/religion a hate crime. Only the creation and distribution of material that is likely to stir up hatred. Which is pretty lacking as far as hate legislation goes.

Attacking somebody is already a crime.

Incitement to hatred (which also includes hate speech, verbal abuse etc.) is a crime.
We also have extensive equality laws under the Equal Status Act.

I think that's all the bases covered. Are we missing anything?
What could possibly happen to upset a member of an ethnic minority that would not be an offence, right now, under one or other of the above?

ohnonotgmail

recedite wrote: »

Attacking somebody is already a crime.

Incitement to hatred (which also includes hate speech, verbal abuse etc.) is a crime.
We also have extensive equality laws under the Equal Status Act.

I think that's all the bases covered. Are we missing anything?
What could possibly happen to upset a member of an ethnic minority that would not be an offence, right now, under one or other of the above?

the post you quoted was quite clear

You'll note that our legislation doesn't actually make attacking someone based on their ethnicity/orientation/religion a hate crime.

recedite

Attacking someone is a crime, full stop.

Why would it have to be based on something? Some criminals are just loopers.
Currently, your victim already has the full backing of the law. Regardless of skin colour.

recedite

Interestingly, you'll note that our legislation doesn't actually make attacking someone while attacker is wearing a hat having the word "dickhead" written on it, a specific crime.
When are the politicians going to fix this glaring loophole?

[Deleted User]

recedite wrote: »

Interestingly, you'll note that our legislation doesn't actually make attacking someone while attacker is wearing a hat having the word "dickhead" written on it, a specific crime.
When are the politicians going to fix this glaring loophole?

Why are you afraid that your going to be attacked for your fashion sense?

Kimsang

cookie1977 wrote: »

You're focused on one (albeit serious) comment, but what about all the rest??

I saw people call stephen a racist (overheal) and I asked could show me where stephen is being racist.

I was told to check myself. That is why I'm focusing on this comment, which seems to be the source of him being called a racist, although as of yet no-one has confirmed this, because the people that are calling stephen a racist lack integrity.

Could you or any that calls Stephen a racist please provide proof, since it is so demonstrable.

Stephen15

I made a tongue in cheek gesture to make rhe point that the term racist is being thrown around like confetti at anything and everything. Having issues with immigration does not make one a racist. Some people don't like cold hard facts that don't show immigration in a positive light.

I have no problem with people of other skin colours living in Ireland as long as they enter legally through a path of controlled immigration. I don't have an issue with induvidual Muslims but yes I do have an issue with Islam as I believe it is a barbaric, medieval ideology which views women as second class citizens. In fact when you talk about hate crimes I think that Islam is fairly hate filled ideology which promotes a toxic hate filled rhetoric which incites hate groups like ISIS, Al-Queda and Boko Haram.

Criticising Islam is not racist as Islam for a start is not a race. If criticising Islam is racist then so too is criticising Christianity, Judaism, Facism, Communism etc. racist.

ILoveYourVibes

Stephen15 wrote: »

I made a tongue in cheek gesture to make rhe point that the term racist is being thrown around like confetti at anything and everything. Having issues with immigration does not make one a racist. Some people don't like cold hard facts that don't show immigration in a positive light.

I have no problem with people of other skin colours living in Ireland as long as they enter legally through a path of controlled immigration. I don't have an issue with induvidual Muslims but yes I do have an issue with Islam as I believe it is a barbaric, medieval ideology which views women as second class citizens. In fact when you talk about hate crimes I think that Islam is fairly hate filled ideology which promotes a toxic hate filled rhetoric which incites hate groups like ISIS, Al-Queda and Boko Haram.

Criticising Islam is not racist as Islam for a start is not a race. If criticising Islam is racist then so too is criticising Christianity, Judaism, Facism, Communism etc. racist.

What has that got to do with Gemma O'Doherty?

Kimsang

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

What has that got to do with Gemma O'Doherty?

Large parts of this thread have been devoted to immigration, its a thing Gemma talks about a lot. When immigration is talked about, people get called racists.

For nearly this whole thread people have been calling Stephen a racist. I think its absolutely disgusting and I am yet to see proof.

Anyone who sees this post as anything other than tongue-in-cheek is willfully ignorant to the point of having no integrity. This seems to be a lot of people.

Kimsang

DubInMeath wrote: »

Why are you afraid that your going to be attacked for your fashion sense?

You always offer the most insightful take on things. Not only do you always keep topics 100% on topic, you always encourage debate with your insightful words of wisdom.

AngryHippie

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

What has that got to do with Gemma O'Doherty?

Because she IS racist ?

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

I saw people call stephen a racist (overheal) and I asked could show me where stephen is being racist.

I was told to check myself. That is why I'm focusing on this comment, which seems to be the source of him being called a racist, although as of yet no-one has confirmed this, because the people that are calling stephen a racist lack integrity.

Could you or any that calls Stephen a racist please provide proof, since it is so demonstrable.

Again it’s in this thread, and I even offered you a brief synopsis, so how is that lacking in integrity? You need two pages (probably more) of the thread containing the relevant conversation copied and pasted for you again? This is how message boards work: Go read it, rather than keep derailing this thread with your flamebaiting nonsense.

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

Anyone who sees this post as anything other than tongue-in-cheek is willfully ignorant to the point of having no integrity. This seems to be a lot of people.

No true Scotsman...

Kimsang

Overheal wrote: »

No true Scotsman...

You have incorrectly conjured a logical fallacy.

Allow me to inform you.

You open called the post in question a racist at least twice that I saw. I challenged this statement and asked you for evidence. You said to go check myself, which I did, and found nothing of the sort. Do you disagree with any of this?

Are you going to continue calling people racists without evidence to support your crap?

This that you wrote for justification for calling him a racist only goes to show your bias. I know you are not alone, there are many of your ilk that have extended the term racism to include just about anyone you disagree with. But the whole lot of you are wrong, and shamefully so.

Overheal wrote: »

Uhm the context is all there. Maybe you missed the floundering conversation where he worked very hard to keep Brown countries out of his definition of the first world, while including numerous third world countries in his “first world” examples. Why derail the thread: if you’ve read the thread you’d know that yes he admits to being a proud racist and has argued for treating anyone not of Irish diaspora as second rate, especially as it pertains to seeking citizenship. You don’t have to look hard when the lad thinks South Africa is “culturally backwards” and SA immigrants too dissimilar to integrate into Irish culture, but somehow Koreans, who don’t even use the same alphabet, eat dogs, etc. are more favorable immigrants from a cultural compatibility perspective. But why am I rehashing this all for you? It’s all in this thread.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Read the last 20 or so pages and I just found out I’m a massive racist too, thanks overheal.

Boards.ie code:

If you’re not a radical leftist you’re a racist.

If you don’t believe what I believe there’s no discussion, you’re wrong.

I can’t give any examples you being racist but you are cos I said so.

Context means nothing. Nothing.

Oh and you’re the one defending antifa on another thread.

Just ****ing wow.

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

You have incorrectly conjured a logical fallacy.

Allow me to inform you.

You open called the post in question a racist at least twice that I saw. I challenged this statement and asked you for evidence. You said to go check myself, which I did, and found nothing of the sort. Do you disagree with any of this?

yes, I disagree with your inability to find the conversation in question, in the thread. You claim to have checked for yourself, and found nothing. Little over two weeks ago, 8/8. Definitely there. Stephen was going off about white supremacist theories (Great Replacement), and at about that time I engaged him re: one of his posts about “diaspora,” that conversation cemented for me at least that Stephen15 is a racist.

This that you wrote for justification for calling him a racist only goes to show your bias.

What bias do I have? Please, explain.

I know you are not alone, there are many of your ilk that have extended the term racism to include just about anyone you disagree with. But the whole lot of you are wrong, and shamefully so.

I happen to disagree with lots of people that aren’t racists, I would actually say the vast majority wouldn’t be. So, no, I don’t think your hypothesis has merit there.

Overheal

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Read the last 20 or so pages and I just found out I’m a massive racist too, thanks overheal.

Boards.ie code:

If you’re not a radical leftist you’re a racist.

If you don’t believe what I believe there’s no discussion, you’re wrong.

I can’t give any examples you being racist but you are cos I said so.

Context means nothing. Nothing.

Oh and you’re the one defending antifa on another thread.

Just ****ing wow.

What are you even talking about.

Kimsang

Overheal wrote: »

What are you even talking about.

You know how you can end this discussion? Give an example or provide proof of how he is a racist. You continue to supply red herrings and move the goalposts, but you already said it was demonstrably true. But you were clearly lying, as you've been given ample opportunity at this stage.

that conversation cemented for me at least that Stephen15 is a racist.

For me at least? What the hell does that mean, he's either a racist or he's not. Subjective bull**** is not allowed in defamation laws. "Your Honour I promise, for me at least it seemed he was a racist" You think this would hold up in a court of law?

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

You know how you can end this discussion? Give an example or provide proof of how he is a racist. You continue to supply red herrings and move the goalposts, but you already said it was demonstrably true. But you were clearly lying, as you've been given ample opportunity at this stage.

See my previous post. I haven’t shifted any goalposts or supplied any red herrings. It is demonstrably true, you just have to get the thumb out and read the thread, it’s bad manners to jump late into a thread and be this obtuse about it.

For me at least? What the hell does that mean, he's either a racist or he's not. Subjective bull**** is not allowed in defamation laws. "Your Honour I promise, for me at least it seemed he was a racist" You think this would hold up in a court of law?

It means I speak (and think) for myself. I never said he “seemed like a racist” I’m telling you that the lad is a racist, demonstrated on this thread that you’re too lazy to go back and read. Until you do, I’m not sure what kind of constructive engagement you hope we would have.

Kimsang

Overheal wrote: »

See my previous post. I haven’t shifted any goalposts or supplied any red herrings. It is demonstrably true, you just have to get the thumb out and read the thread, it’s bad manners to jump late into a thread and be this obtuse about it.

It means I speak (and think) for myself. I never said he “seemed like a racist” I’m telling you that the lad is a racist, demonstrated on this thread that you’re too lazy to go back and read. Until you do, I’m not sure what kind of constructive engagement you hope we would have.

I have read this thread and you're talking bollocks.

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

I have read this thread and you're talking bollocks,

Afraid not.

Kimsang

Overheal wrote: »

Afraid not.

Afraid so? wanna continue to play this game? You can end it by supplying proof.

Its impossible for me to prove the negative that Stephen is not a racist, I suspect you know that and is why you are framing the discussion in this way.

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

Afraid so? wanna continue to play this game? You can end it by supplying proof.

Its impossible for me to prove the negative that Stephen is not a racist, I suspect you know that and is why you are framing the discussion in this way.

You are correct in saying it is impossible to prove a negative. Fortunately there isn’t a negative to prove. I have supplied more than enough information for you to get to the posts/conversation in this thread you claim to have read (but clearly haven’t). So you’ve lied to me, and insinuated I have no integrity: so I literally have no motivation to extend you the courtesy of a post#, link, or direct quotes to part of the thread. Just, all you have to do, is go do the thing you claimed to have done already: read the thread, or at the very least find the conversation using the information I already supplied to you in good faith.

Kimsang

Overheal wrote: »

You are correct in saying it is impossible to prove a negative. Fortunately there isn’t a negative to prove. I have supplied more than enough information for you to get to the posts/conversation in this thread you claim to have read (but clearly haven’t). So you’ve lied to me, and insinuated I have no integrity: so I literally have no motivation to extend you the courtesy of a post#, link, or direct quotes to part of the thread. Just, all you have to do, is go do the thing you claimed to have done already: read the thread, or at the very least find the conversation using the information I already supplied to you in good faith.

You just keep digging that hole don't you? The very first request I made to you

Kimsang wrote: »

Could you please direct me to evidence of this? It is quite the claim...

was met with..

Overheal wrote: »

It’s in the thread.

And since then not once have you supplied any evidence, except for weird spiels about immigration and brown countries.

You could have ended this discussion about 300 posts ago, but no you continue to not supply evidence and keep digging a hole. The tactics you are employing is the reason people can't communicate and debate anymore. You can label whoever you like a racist and get away with it. Disgusting. I find people like you vile and disgusting.

Annasopra

Kimsang wrote: »

I have read this thread and you're talking bollocks.

Perhaps then like Stephen you have a different understanding of what racism is to that of most people. Maybe its not us but you.

batgoat

Kimsang wrote: »

Afraid so? wanna continue to play this game? You can end it by supplying proof.

Its impossible for me to prove the negative that Stephen is not a racist, I suspect you know that and is why you are framing the discussion in this way.

He has adamantly claimed that the gear replacement is occurring. A conspiracy of the far right and white supremacists. He proudly supports the national party, which is led by a guy who attended Neo Nazi rallies. He has regularly said that he doesn't view certain people to be really Irish even though they're Irish citizens and have been born here. He only generally seems to apply that rule if they don't fit what an Irish person should look like in his vision.

That's only off hand examples, there are many more.

[Deleted User]

Kimsang wrote: »

You always offer the most insightful take on things. Not only do you always keep topics 100% on topic, you always encourage debate with your insightful words of wisdom.

Hmm I see that you decided to quote this post rather than my earlier one, where I pointed out that based on his previous posts Stephen would see you as someone who isn't Irish and that if Gemma and her ilk get their way then you will have to leave the country. If it dies happen make sure that the door doesn't hit you in the arse on the way out and best of luck where ever you end up.

Also in terms of my reply post you quoted, it was actually pointing out that people get attacked for wearing an item of clothing related to their sexuality or religion by the type of idiots who follow her and support her. The same type of idiots who would happily kick the **** out of you and are the same type of idiots who attacked Sikhs after the September 11 attacks in the U.S. I guess that somethings just go over some people's heads.

pablohoney87

Kimsang wrote: »

Afraid so? wanna continue to play this game? You can end it by supplying proof.

Its impossible for me to prove the negative that Stephen is not a racist, I suspect you know that and is why you are framing the discussion in this way.

The great replacement theory is racist.

He has echoed it numerous times across multiple threads. Proof enough?

He only included white countries in his definition of "first world". Prood enough?

Boom_Bap

Jaysus lads, you have an honest description fro Stephen on his view but yet you are still running around with pitch forks trying to put a label on him and shunt him into a box.

You should be happy that you have someone honest from an 'opposite' side to have a discussion with rather than trying to dial back anything he says by pigeonholing him.