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; } } }

Child Item

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

Quick Links

Comments

Annasopra

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

You are absolutely desperate for a racism angle.

'Racists...racists everywhere'

To be fair. Highlighting black kids on school photos as shameful etc is racist.

Birneybau

I'm not gonna start quoting the usuals and their disingenuous cr@p but we can all see Gemma sharing a picture of a racially mixed classroom in Ireland is absolute Great Replacement dog whistling.

Which leads to the likes of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christchurch_mosque_shootings#Manifesto

Eric Cartman

Birneybau wrote: »

I'm not gonna start quoting the usuals and their disingenuous cr@p but we can all see Gemma sharing a picture of a racially mixed classroom in Ireland is absolute Great Replacement dog whistling.

Which leads to the likes of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christchurch_mosque_shootings#Manifesto

well thats a fair bit of a leap there.... madness.

Birneybau

Eric Cartman wrote: »

well thats a fair bit of a leap there.... madness.

I'm loathe to reply but why don't you tell me what her picture represents?

Obviously NZ massacre is an outlier, burning DP centres, not so much.

Eric Cartman

Birneybau wrote: »

I'm loathe to reply but why don't you tell me what her picture represents?

Obviously NZ massacre is an outlier, burning DP centres, not so much.

Her picture was used for racist purposes, but suggesting GOD sharing a picture of majority black school kids will lead to a mosque shooting is a leap.

The burning of the DP centre was likely more to do with the council not listening to the legitimate concerns by the majority of the small town concerned, and not some nut job showing people pictures of children. I feel it also has to be pointed out that it was a 'future site' of a DP centre and nobody was in the building at the time, a fact many leave out to make it seem worse. I would expect a similar response if rural Ireland had a halfway house for sex offenders or a methadone clinic and junkie hostel foist upon it despite massive local objection.

and before anyone starts, expecting a result and condoning it are two different things. I do not condone the burning of buildings.

[Deleted User]

Jesus, imagine thinking a DP centre is comparable to a junkie hostel or sex offenders centre!

Annasopra

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Her picture was used for racist purposes, but suggesting GOD sharing a picture of majority black school kids will lead to a mosque shooting is a leap.

The burning of the DP centre was likely more to do with the council not listening to the legitimate concerns by the majority of the small town concerned, and not some nut job showing people pictures of children. I feel it also has to be pointed out that it was a 'future site' of a DP centre and nobody was in the building at the time, a fact many leave out to make it seem worse. I would expect a similar response if rural Ireland had a halfway house for sex offenders or a methadone clinic and junkie hostel foist upon it despite massive local objection.

and before anyone starts, expecting a result and condoning it are two different things. I do not condone the burning of buildings.

"Expecting a result" - sounds like excusing it to me. Its amazing how everyone goes on about all these "massive local objections" - generally there isnt "massive local objections" - just a few racists wound up by outsiders swooping in.

Its hilarious too that some here claim there is no danger from far right racists then try to downplay burning proposed dp centres, burning tds cars, death threats against the Ryan family, regular online harassment of Aneta Safiak.

[Deleted User]

bubblypop wrote: »

Jesus, imagine thinking a DP centre is comparable to a junkie hostel or sex offenders centre!

He did outline his concerns about hate speech against the wealthy a few pages back. Apparently some unknown Connolly youth group is more concerning than Gemma's antics.

It's worth noting that Gemma and Co ranted more about great replacement conspiracies after Christchurch.

Eric Cartman

bubblypop wrote: »

Jesus, imagine thinking a DP centre is comparable to a junkie hostel or sex offenders centre!

true, I suppose the junkies and sex offenders have a legal right to be in the country...

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

"Expecting a result" - sounds like excusing it to me. Its amazing how everyone goes on about all these "massive local objections" - generally there isnt "massive local objections" - just a few racists wound up by outsiders swooping in.

Its hilarious too that some here claim there is no danger from far right racists then try to downplay burning proposed dp centres, burning tds cars, death threats against the Ryan family, regular online harassment of Aneta Safiak.

wow , just throw everything and the kitchen sink at it. nobody discussed any of the rest of that.

as regards local opposition there were 140 people turned out in cahirsaveen to protest it :
https://www.independent.ie/incoming/d9eb3/39236740.ece/AUTOCROP/w1000/ks%20Protest%20%207.jpg

are all those people 'just a few racists'

ohnonotgmail

Eric Cartman wrote: »

true, I suppose the junkies and sex offenders have a legal right to be in the country...

so do asylum seekers until it is decided otherwise. what is your point?

Eric Cartman

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so do asylum seekers until it is decided otherwise. what is your point?

it was a more a tongue in cheek response to that users Helen Lovejoy style post. All three of those things are equally undesirable for the same reason, crime. Everyone knows that, but sure as per usual somebody who will never be within a mile of a DP centre pretends like its a positive to the community.

ohnonotgmail

Eric Cartman wrote: »

it was a more a tongue in cheek response to that users Helen Lovejoy style post. All three of those things are equally undesirable for the same reason, crime. Everyone knows that, but sure as per usual somebody who will never be within a mile of a DP centre pretends like its a positive to the community.

so asylum seekers are criminals? It has been fairly clear for a good while that you think it but nice to have it confirmed.

Eric Cartman

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so asylum seekers are criminals? It has been fairly clear for a good while that you think it but nice to have it confirmed.

well 90% of them, yes. 'illegal immigrants'
they didn't end up in DP by handing over a passport and overstaying a holiday visa.
Illegally entering a country is a crime...

[Deleted User]

Eric Cartman wrote: »

it was a more a tongue in cheek response to that users Helen Lovejoy style post. All three of those things are equally undesirable for the same reason, crime. Everyone knows that, but sure as per usual somebody who will never be within a mile of a DP centre pretends like its a positive to the community.

They are not undesirable for the same reasons, particularly not crime!
You're hilarious.
DP centres do not cause crimes.
not sure what crime you think any sex offenders centre bring? Do you think there are more sexual offences committed near it? There isnt.
And who hasn't been within a mile of a DP centre?!!

[Deleted User]

Eric Cartman wrote: »

well 90% of them, yes. 'illegal immigrants'
they didn't end up in DP by handing over a passport and overstaying a holiday visa.
Illegally entering a country is a crime...

They are not entering illegally if they are claiming asylum.
It's up to the system to decide if they entitled to stay or not.
Perhaps you just don't understand...........

ohnonotgmail

Eric Cartman wrote: »

well 90% of them, yes. 'illegal immigrants'
they didn't end up in DP by handing over a passport and overstaying a holiday visa.
Illegally entering a country is a crime...

they sought asylum which they are entitled to do.

Eric Cartman

bubblypop wrote: »

They are not entering illegally if they are claiming asylum.
It's up to the system to decide if they entitled to stay or not.
Perhaps you just don't understand...........

Yes... I don't understand why we need to house any migrants when we're going to turn away 90% of them and then they just fight and fight at our expense until the government gives up and lets them stay. We shouldn't need to burden rural Ireland with these people. A big fast processing centre that they can't leave , near the airport, 90 days in and out, deport most of them and heavily surveil the ones that stay for a decade.

Why aren't they coming in legally, they can afford plane tickets or ferry tickets, why aren't they registering legally with documents ? is it because we may turn them away....

Penfailed

Eric Cartman wrote: »

well 90% of them, yes. 'illegal immigrants'
they didn't end up in DP by handing over a passport and overstaying a holiday visa.
Illegally entering a country is a crime...

You obviously don't know what you are talking about. They didn't enter the country illegally.

[Deleted User]

Eric Cartman wrote: »

it was a more a tongue in cheek response to that users Helen Lovejoy style post. All three of those things are equally undesirable for the same reason, crime. Everyone knows that, but sure as per usual somebody who will never be within a mile of a DP centre pretends like its a positive to the community.

Weird, my parents live in a pretty affluent area which has had a direct provision center for about two decades. No crime issue brought about because of it and haven't heard about any complaints anyone who lived there.

I can also think of examples of people who went through direct provision who did more community work than plenty of Irish people. Eg I was volunteering with a group that was teaching elderly people. A fair proportion of the others teaching were in direct provision or had been previously.

Eric Cartman

Penfailed wrote: »

You obviously don't know what you are talking about. They didn't enter the country illegally.

how do you know that, how did they board the plane, why do so many show up with no documentation.

Eric Cartman

Deleted User wrote: »

Weird, my parents live in a pretty affluent area which has had a direct provision center for about two decades. No crime issue brought about because of it and haven't heard about any complaints anyone who lived there.

I can also think of examples of people who went through direct provision who did more community work than plenty of Irish people. Eg I was volunteering with a group that was teaching elderly people. A fair proportion of the others teaching were in direct provision or had been previously.

well one anecdote , thats completely thrown out my world view so. Boards.ie where anecdotes count as facts and actual facts are racist.

ohnonotgmail

Eric Cartman wrote: »

how do you know that, how did they board the plane, why do so many show up with no documentation.

does that mean they are here illegally?

[Deleted User]

Eric Cartman wrote: »

well one anecdote , thats completely thrown out my world view so. Boards.ie where anecdotes count as facts and actual facts are racist.

Cool, got any statistical proof that direct provision is responsible for a rise in crime? You made the original claim and said none of us would be happy to live near one. I'd happily do so but the place I'm thinking of is pretty expensive to buy in...

Your world view tends to be pretty dreadful btw...

Penfailed

Eric Cartman wrote: »

how do you know that, how did they board the plane, why do so many show up with no documentation.

They won't be able to get on a plane with no documents. How do you know that many show up without documentation?

osarusan

Eric Cartman wrote: »

iAll three of those things are equally undesirable for the same reason, crime.

Post up some evidence that a direct provision centre leads to greater crime in the surrounding area, equal to a halfway house for sex offenders or a methadone clinic.

[Deleted User]

There is no reason to believe that a centre for sex offenders caused any rise in crime either.

hynesie08

Isn't most of the crime involving direct provision centres that places that get mentioned as becoming them get burned down?

Annasopra

Eric Cartman wrote: »

it was a more a tongue in cheek response to that users Helen Lovejoy style post. All three of those things are equally undesirable for the same reason, crime. Everyone knows that, but sure as per usual somebody who will never be within a mile of a DP centre pretends like its a positive to the community.

What? Im not aware of incresed crime stats near DP Centres. Really shoeing your true colours now.

Annasopra

Eric Cartman wrote: »

well one anecdote , thats completely thrown out my world view so. Boards.ie where anecdotes count as facts and actual facts are racist.

What facts have you got to show that there is loads of crime caused by DP centres?

[Deleted User]

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

What facts have you got to show that there is loads of crime caused by DP centres?

Strangely enough, he's not posted any proof since numerous people called him out on his claim... He's posted multiple times in the thread though. Strange.