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

Timberrrrrrrr

Lonesomerhodes wrote: »

Harm someone else.

Talk about being paranoid.

I'm not a fan of Gems bit too hysterical for me agree with her on somethings.

I do thing most of the posters here are simply jealous of her being a millionairess.
Plain old Green eyed monster.

Begrudging, sure it's the National past time.

Couldn't give a tiny shine shìte how much money she has, I'm happy being comfortable with what I have knowing I'm not a racist low life that puts children's lives at risk with bat shìte ideologies.

Tacitus Kilgore

Lonesomerhodes wrote: »

Harm someone else.

Talk about being paranoid.

I'm not a fan of Gems bit too hysterical for me agree with her on somethings.

I do thing most of the posters here are simply jealous of her being a millionairess.
Plain old Green eyed monster.

Begrudging, sure it's the National past time.

Wow

splinter65

alastair wrote: »

Ehh:

So, is that post history checking part of this ‘mob mentality‘ too? I’m getting an awful whiff of hypocrisy.

Calling out bullies is hypocrisy now I see. And you seem to be confused about what constitutes a “mob” alastair. I’m one person vs the dozen or so super tolerant kind progressive left leaning posters here who are so apparently concerned about the affect that one nut job nobody has on vaccination rates that they feel the need to goad and hound her for...how many pages is this thread?

[Deleted User]

The Nal wrote: »

You posted this yesterday

lol

Yep and look what that turned out to be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg-jtYXvI7M

Timberrrrrrrr

splinter65 wrote: »

Calling out bullies is hypocrisy now I see. And you seem to be confused about what constitutes a “mob” alastair. I’m one person vs the dozen or so super tolerant kind progressive left leaning posters here who are so apparently concerned about the affect that one nut job nobody has on vaccination rates that they feel the need to goad and hound her for...how many pages is this thread?

Does she read this thread?

[Deleted User]

splinter65 wrote: »

You can encourage and applaud attacks on a mentally ill woman and you’re being brave and defending the vulnerable, but her screeched ravings which are reported nowhere but the darkest places on SM is “inciting a hateful mob”. This will be the big problem with more hate speech legislation.

Twitter and Facebook are the darkest places of SM, I'm not on them because I couldn't be arsed but they are far from the darkest.

Also who is attacking her, highlighting what bull she spouts and what it is, isn't attacking her just highlighting that she has some ****e beliefs.

splinter65

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

the video is edited to jump cuts but audio, isnt this isnt one of mine, as per a previous post with her facebook gone & youtube too then I think its time to let her slip away into obscurity so I didt share it on twitter , I shared it on here as its a relativley small discussion compared to twitter

also for the record I believe Gemma to be a nasty vindcitve cold narcisstic person through personal experience.
I know for a fact she was acting this way before her husband died, I have saw people use his passing as an excuse. But I know she was a bully and all the above before he ever got sick.
off course it must have took a toll on her and I do believe her to be mentally ill now, & TBH the best thing that could happen to her is for twitter to close her last remaing platform.
the scary thing is people still taking her word as gospel !

but thats their problem , the Electorate have spoken, she got half the % in the general election in Fingal of what she got in the locals a few months ago.. she has no mandate at all from the people, yet her livestreams often start with "when I take control im gonna do this & that and fire such and such ...."

full blown now down the rabiit hole and to be pitied more than anything but deserves to be mocked too , but im done with her shes getting no more attention from me

You keep saying that you’re done with Gemma but then you can’t resist one more go. I’m sorry about you’re whole family tragic history, and I’m deeply sympathetic with what you’re trying to achieve, but I honestly believe that if you just block her and drop it she’ll eventually burn herself out. The constant back and forth will never end unless you be the much much bigger person and let her at it.

splinter65

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Does she read this thread?

Why not?

[Deleted User]

splinter65 wrote: »

You keep saying that you’re done with Gemma but then you can’t resist one more go. I’m sorry about you’re whole family tragic history, and I’m deeply sympathetic with what you’re trying to achieve, but I honestly believe that if you just block her and drop it she’ll eventually burn herself out. The constant back and forth will never end unless you be the much much bigger person and let her at it.

If you don't follow her on Twitter, how do you know she is being harassed by this poster as you claim?

alastair

splinter65 wrote: »

Calling out bullies is hypocrisy now I see. And you seem to be confused about what constitutes a “mob” alastair. I’m one person vs the dozen or so super tolerant kind progressive left leaning posters here who are so apparently concerned about the affect that one nut job nobody has on vaccination rates that they feel the need to goad and hound her for...how many pages is this thread?

Ehh, you were responding to a singular person’s looking at your post history. That’s the context.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=112538523&postcount=5513

alastair

splinter65 wrote: »

You keep saying that you’re done with Gemma but then you can’t resist one more go. I’m sorry about you’re whole family tragic history, and I’m deeply sympathetic with what you’re trying to achieve, but I honestly believe that if you just block her and drop it she’ll eventually burn herself out. The constant back and forth will never end unless you be the much much bigger person and let her at it.

A notion undermined by the fact that Germa blocked him long ago. Germa has blocked everyone who has the slightest disagreement with her. She doesn’t do ‘back and forth’. She’s unwilling to debate anyone.

Timberrrrrrrr

splinter65 wrote: »

Why not?

If there is a thread on some forum somewhere where they were to talk about me but I didn't know it existed or never read it then i wouldnt consider it "goading" or "bullying" it would just be strangers talking about me.

If I did know about it and had issues with what was being said then I could/would ask for it to be removed. If Gemma has an issue with the comments here then she should come on thread and explain and her ideals.

[Deleted User]

alastair wrote: »

Ehh, you were responding to a singular person’s looking at your post history. That’s the context.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=112538523&postcount=5513

Splinter said that she was going to put me on her ignore list when I posted evidence that something she claimed was a fact was actually bs in another thread. Never used the ignore function on here myself so don't know if she would be aware of the post or not, but might explain why she didn't answer the question I asked.

alastair

DubInMeath wrote: »

Really if your worried about what people can read online, you might want to look at your own post history, you've made plenty of nasty statements around public figures and cases.

You were banned from the first thread reporting on the death of Ana Kriégel for trying to make an issue about immigrants, do you not think that her family would have been upset by you using her death in this way?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=107040359&postcount=184

Ahh - so maybe this was missed?

[Deleted User]

alastair wrote: »

Ahh - so maybe this was missed?

Possible or just not answered, because well how do you square that circle.

Timberrrrrrrr

DubInMeath wrote: »

Possible or just not answered, because well how do you square that circle.

It explains the love for Gemma though.

alastair

Penn wrote: »

I didn't know until it was mentioned yesterday that she might be a millionaire. If anything I was previously happy knowing she'd lost her deposits and other costs for her failed election bids but can now see the costs of that are nothing to her really.

So I can safely say I'm not jealous of her being a millionairess.

I think she's a disgusting, dangerous, racist, hateful scumbag. And that's not something I'm jealous of.

If she sold off her inherited properties she’d probably have decent walking around money. But as you say, it’s an irrelevance. I doubt anyone is jealous of her situation - a thin-skinned hate-monger with no friends, shilling cant and conspiracy? No thanks.

splinter65

alastair wrote: »

A notion undermined by the fact that Germa blocked him long ago. Germa has blocked everyone who has the slightest disagreement with her. She doesn’t do ‘back and forth’. She’s unwilling to debate anyone.

So leave it then. She doesn’t have to debate with you if she doesn’t want to. You do understand that? People block me or put me on ignore and I block people and put them on ignore. I seem to find it easy to just continue with my life without feeling the overwhelming need to continue trying to engage with someone who doesn’t want to engage with me.If I put someone on ignore or block them or unfriend them then I expect them to accept that and move on without any splinter65 related content in their SM presence. Am I being unreasonable in that?

alastair

splinter65 wrote: »

So leave it then. She doesn’t have to debate with you if she doesn’t want to. You do understand that? People block me or put me on ignore and I block people and put them on ignore. I seem to find it easy to just continue with my life without feeling the overwhelming need to continue trying to engage with someone who doesn’t want to engage with me.If I put someone on ignore or block them or unfriend them then I expect them to accept that and move on without any splinter65 related content in their SM presence. Am I being unreasonable in that?

Not really the point, is it?
The more her incitement is highlighted, the quicker her twitter ban day comes. The closer the victims of her harassment get to some peace.

ArmaniJeanss

splinter65 wrote: »

So leave it then. She doesn’t have to debate with you if she doesn’t want to. You do understand that? People block me or put me on ignore and I block people and put them on ignore. I seem to find it easy to just continue with my life without feeling the overwhelming need to continue trying to engage with someone who doesn’t want to engage with me.If I put someone on ignore or block them or unfriend them then I expect them to accept that and move on without any splinter65 related content in their SM presence. Am I being unreasonable in that?

Once she put herself forward for election, then it all becomes valid for discussion. People are entitled to question her policies and actions, and attempt to engage with her. She's entitled not to engage, but people have every right then to make this failure part of the discussion.

If she wasn't running her own politicized movement and attempting to get elected to multiple offices, then her private social media musings would be ignored here.

TheRepentent

Always find it faintly amusing watching the boards.ie cockroaches try and defend that rascist kunt.

Annasopra

splinter65 wrote: »

You can encourage and applaud attacks on a mentally ill woman and you’re being brave and defending the vulnerable, but her screeched ravings which are reported nowhere but the darkest places on SM is “inciting a hateful mob”. This will be the big problem with more hate speech legislation.

Stop deflecting.

Gemmas the racist hatemonger here. Gemma incites violence against children because of their skin colour. Gemma is the hatemongering bully here.

olestoepoke

Lord save us all from the Social Justice Warriors.

splinter65

alastair wrote: »

Not really the point, is it?
The more her incitement is highlighted, the quicker her twitter ban day comes. The closer the victims of her harassment get to some peace.

You’re a gold medal winning SJW alastair. Battling away there day and night defending the victims of O’Dohertys harassment. Oh it is twitter and of course anyone being harassed can simply block her and report her but they don’t need to when they have you to fight the good fight.
Anyone who says you’re just indulging yourself because she’s easy pickings is a liar.

splinter65

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Stop deflecting.

Gemmas the racist hatemonger here. Gemma incites violence against children because of their skin colour. Gemma is the hatemongering bully here.

Gemma is mentally ill. But I know that in the pecking order of victim hood she’s very far down the page and possibly not even on it. So keep on insisting that this level of vitriol is both justified and necessary.

Penn

splinter65 wrote: »

Gemma is mentally ill.

Is she though? Don't get me wrong, I do think it's a definite possibility. But it's also quite likely she's not. People do share her beliefs, and there could be psychological conditions which exacerbate those beliefs but not in a way that would be classed as mental illness.

Just saying, she is at the very least, a functioning, cognisant adult, and while her behaviour is abhorrent and outlandish to most of us, it's also carefully planned and she doesn't do things which puts her in harm or anything. There is a reasoned approach in her actions however disgusting those actions are.

We have no proof of mental illness.

charlietheminxx

splinter65 wrote: »

You’re a gold medal winning SJW alastair. Battling away there day and night defending the victims of O’Dohertys harassment. Oh it is twitter and of course anyone being harassed can simply block her and report her but they don’t need to when they have you to fight the good fight.
Anyone who says you’re just indulging yourself because she’s easy pickings is a liar.

It's not just Twitter though, she does it in real life

Are we not allowed complain about her screaming at our neighbours?

The Nal

Penn wrote: »

We have no proof of mental illness.

That video from the other day is a textbook manic episode. Grandiose delusions, paranoid rage etc. Chapter 1, line 1. Healthy people don't behave like that.

I can't help feeling shes being used by people like Justin Barrett, well mainly Justin Barrett, who is more than happy to let her go out there and do all the dirty work with her relative fame and he'll use her as a right wing temp check for the public. He'll turn up for the odd cameo to show "support" but in reality shes a pawn.

charlietheminxx wrote: »

It's not just Twitter though, she does it in real life Are we not allowed complain about her screaming at our neighbours?

Does she?

charlietheminxx

The Nal wrote: »

Does she?

She does, sometimes while live-streaming the whole thing.

[Deleted User]

splinter65 wrote: »

Gemma is mentally ill. But I know that in the pecking order of victim hood she’s very far down the page and possibly not even on it. So keep on insisting that this level of vitriol is both justified and necessary.

Lots of people are mentally ill without becoming racist hatemongers.