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

The Nal

ollkiller wrote: »

Could this thread go back to being about Gemma. Thanks.

Shes not protesting anymore. There were 5 people outside Google the other day. 1 of them was the guy in the Halloween costume.

She just retweets stuff now.

Village editorial here from the weekend. They double down on calling her a racist.

https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2019/08/village-editorial-september-gemma-odoherty-2019/

You forget some of the lunacy. In mid-August she tweeted: “Wondering why the skies over Ireland look so artificial? The psychopathic elite are blocking the sun from us and poisoning the air above us with chemicals. This is genocide”.

lol!

TaurenDruid

ollkiller wrote: »

Could this thread go back to being about Gemma. Thanks.

So - Gemma, then.

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165741246033387520

LED lights are "deadly"?! Who knew?!

Also, retweeting about censorship by Google of the word "covfefe"...

She's not too happy with the Village Magazine editorial about her, either...

ohnonotgmail

TaurenDruid wrote: »

So - Gemma, then.

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165741246033387520

LED lights are "deadly"?! Who knew?!

Also, retweeting about censorship by Google of the word "covfefe"...

She's not too happy with the Village Magazine editorial about her, either...

Deadly? they're bleedin' brilliant.

hetuzozaho

Just looking through her tweets there

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165904009166761985?s=20

I seen TDS used on this Forum by a poster yesterday and didn't know what it was. You learn something new everyday ha!

[Deleted User]

Kimsang wrote: »

What you sent me certainly crossed the line of decency and I'm happy to see the person punished- comments like that add nothing to the discussion.

I'm curious, would you say this has crossed the line of decency?
Numerous people have called Stephen a racist. I think it is equally as disgusting as what you sent me.

When in fact he didn't admit he was a racist. He said it tongue-in-cheek to challenge the definition of racist.

Try using the search functions on the site.

francois

The Nal wrote: »

Shes not protesting anymore. There were 5 people outside Google the other day. 1 of them was the guy in the Halloween costume.

She just retweets stuff now.

Village editorial here from the weekend. They double down on calling her a racist.

https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2019/08/village-editorial-september-gemma-odoherty-2019/

You forget some of the lunacy. In mid-August she tweeted: “Wondering why the skies over Ireland look so artificial? The psychopathic elite are blocking the sun from us and poisoning the air above us with chemicals. This is genocide”.

lol!

Good to see the Village not holding back, though no doubt she'll threaten (again) to sue

Lackadaisical

If she's so concerned about 5G and LEDs she might want to stop using mobile devices entirely. I find the hypocrisy quite amusing - ranting about what are basically the two technologies (LEDs making up every mobile display and also portable lighting) and LTE+ mobile signals that are the very tools that enable her.

Maybe she might heed her own advice and go back to typewriters and candles?

Overheal

Struggling to understand how LEDs/LCDs etc are harmful in the slightest.

Annasopra

Overheal wrote: »

Struggling to understand how LEDs/LCDs etc are harmful in the slightest.

Gemmas smart dust guy could teach you?

Ha Long Bay

francois wrote: »

Good to see the Village not holding back, though no doubt she'll threaten (again) to sue

It didn't take long.

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165967010943123456?s=20

Timberrrrrrrr

john4321 wrote: »

It didn't take long.

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165967010943123456?s=20

Loved this line

"This is possibly the most egregious defamation in the history of the state. "

She really does have a high opinion of herself.

[Deleted User]

john4321 wrote: »

It didn't take long.

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1165967010943123456?s=20

You would imagine that she would know how long it takes for a case to get to court.

The Nal

Thats a very obvious bait by the Village lads. Shes really worked herself into a corner. If she ever did end up in court the info she would have to reveal and that would be open to investigation would destroy her.

Overheal

The Nal wrote: »

Thats a very obvious bait by the Village lads. Shes really worked herself into a corner. If she ever did end up in court the info she would have to reveal and that would be open to investigation would destroy her.

What’s the quote they made

ArmaniJeanss

The Nal wrote: »

Shes not protesting anymore. There were 5 people outside Google the other day. 1 of them was the guy in the Halloween costume.

She just retweets stuff now.

Village editorial here from the weekend. They double down on calling her a racist.

https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2019/08/village-editorial-september-gemma-odoherty-2019/

You forget some of the lunacy. In mid-August she tweeted: “Wondering why the skies over Ireland look so artificial? The psychopathic elite are blocking the sun from us and poisoning the air above us with chemicals. This is genocide”.

lol!

Overheal wrote: »

What’s the quote they made

From the article in TheNal's link.

"While O’Doherty is one of the nastiest forces in Irish politics, and getting ever nastier, she has been careful not to hitch herself to clearcut fascism. It would be unfair to call O’Doherty a Nazi now."

That looks the legally dodgy line - despite the way it's phrased I believe it could be considered to be calling her a Nazi.

ohnonotgmail

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

From the article in TheNal's link.

"While O’Doherty is one of the nastiest forces in Irish politics, and getting ever nastier, she has been careful not to hitch herself to clearcut fascism. It would be unfair to call O’Doherty a Nazi now."

That looks the legally dodgy line - despite the way it's phrased I believe it could be considered to be calling her a Nazi.

It would be unfair to call O’Doherty a Nazi now

They are very clearly not calling her a nazi. She will be laughed out of court.

Overheal

They explicitly say it would be unfair to call her a Nazi and that she hasn’t tied herself to clearcut fascism. How is that defamatory?

ArmaniJeanss

Overheal wrote: »

They explicitly say it would be unfair to call her a Nazi and that she hasn’t tied herself to clearcut fascism. How is that defamatory?

**Not a legal expert**
In UK&Irl I don't think you can use phrasing like that to get around potential libel.
You couldn't for example say 'It would be unfair to call Overheal a child-molester' having spent some time discussing the flaws of Overheal - a reasonable interpretation would be that you were trying to make such an accusation in a roundabout way.
**Not a legal expert**

The Nal

The problem for Gems is that shes open in court to having all of her tweets, livestreams, rants etc trawled through and presented in a condensed manner that will make her look completely crazy. Its also possible that her funding may be examined as well as fellow ACI members, silent supporters revealed and so on.

She doesn't want attention like this on herself just to potentially win a small libel case.

I hope I'm wrong though.

cookie1977

Isn't that what Fox news do on their ticker? Put loopy statements about people they dont like on screen with a question mark at the end.

"Obama a terrorist?"

ohnonotgmail

cookie1977 wrote: »

Isn't that what Fox news do on their ticker? Put loopy statements about people they dont like on screen with a question mark at the end.

"Obama a terrorist?"

Except village magazine didnt do that. they were quite explicit that it would be unfair to call her a nazi. there was no innuendo at all.

Lackadaisical

I'm not a legal expert either, but she's claiming she'll be in the High Court tomorrow. That's extremely rapid, given that cases usually take months (sometimes years) to even get to the stage where you're approaching court.

Also aren't all High Court cases publicly listed? It would be interesting to see how this case progresses ...

ohnonotgmail

Lackadaisical wrote: »

I'm not a legal expert either, but she's claiming she'll be in the High Court tomorrow. That's extremely rapid, given that cases usually take months (sometimes years) to even get to the stage where you're approaching court.

Also aren't all High Court cases publicly listed? It would be interesting to see how this case progresses ...

she is blowing it out of her ass.

Overheal

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

she is blowing it out of her ass.

Good point probably faster to use the restroom in the high court and then tell people you were there. Of course the implication being you were doing serious things and not... your duty.

Stark

In the High Court being escorted back outside by security.

randd1

Ah, Gemma O'Doherty.

The answer to the questions "what is nuttier than a squirrels larder" and "who could look at a pint of Guinness and say its perfect because the white rises above the balck".

Kimsang

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

**Not a legal expert**
In UK&Irl I don't think you can use phrasing like that to get around potential libel.
You couldn't for example say 'It would be unfair to call Overheal a child-molester' having spent some time discussing the flaws of Overheal - a reasonable interpretation would be that you were trying to make such an accusation in a roundabout way.
**Not a legal expert**

It's fine around here though. That's why I assume the surprise of posters including mods as to why implications like this without evidence is completely wrong.
"Oh but I didn't say that exactly" is not a proper excuse but one used oh so often around here by the woke brigade.

ohnonotgmail

Kimsang wrote: »

It's fine around here though. That's why I assume the surprise of posters including mods as to why implications like this without evidence is completely wrong.
"Oh but I didn't say that exactly" is not a proper excuse but one used oh so often around here by the woke brigade.

the article was quite explicit in not calling her a nazi. it is there in black and white. they didnt imply she was a nazi though you seem to have inferred it.

Odhinn

Kimsang wrote: »

It's fine around here though. That's why I assume the surprise of posters including mods as to why implications like this without evidence is completely wrong.
"Oh but I didn't say that exactly" is not a proper excuse but one used oh so often around here by the woke brigade.

Who? Care to name them?

Sofiztikated

Stark wrote: »

In the High Court being escorted back outside by security.

Did she just go to the High Court to press the matter, without going through the proper channels?