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

Poet, Activist, Parkinson's sufferer and Granny (79) gets jailed for 6 months.

Options
1…4344454648

Comments

  • Options
    #1412
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    Shakti wrote: »
    Wouldn't it be hard to bring a case against an "administrative error".

    i would imagine any decent barrister would make light work of that line
    to be honest id question why its never been attempted (im open to correction on that) even just for the publicity factor
    im no expert but my opinion is it hasnt been tried for fear of losing which would strip the protesters of one of the biggest arguments they have if it was proved constitutional


  • Options
    #1413
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    jimboblep wrote: »
    i would imagine any decent barrister would make light work of that line
    to be honest id question why its never been attempted (im open to correction on that) even just for the publicity factor
    im no expert but my opinion is it hasnt been tried for fear of losing which would strip the protesters of one of the biggest arguments they have if it was proved constitutional

    So they're left with little option only to protest,


  • Options
    #1414
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    Shadow Walker wrote: »
    I had the misfortune of sitting through Conversations with the state ( at least I think that's what it called) and a more rambling disjointed collection of half truths I have never before heard. There was one clip where Margaretta was walking out of Shannon Garda Station and she was met by an interviewer with a movie camera . It started ok with Margaretta answering soft spoon fed questions by the "interviewer". Unfortunately Margaretta then forgot her script and the interviewer had to feed her the questions and then feed her the answers to try and get her back on track. It was farcical and a true reflection of the whole show. Ms D'arcy then gloated that she would embarrass the state at her court case and even if she was convicted she wouldn't be jailed because of her age. She had two cronies in the audience who again kept feeding her the script. It was so funny.

    So yes I have already had the dubious pleasure of having heard Ms D'arcy once and that was once too often.

    I find the slick of the polished politic more embarrassing TBH.


  • Options
    #1415
    ProfessorPlum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,803 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    Shakti wrote: »
    So they're left with little option only to protest,

    Nobody here is denying them their right to protest.


  • Options
    #1416
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    Shakti wrote: »
    So they're left with little option only to protest,

    never claimed i had a problem with protest i have a problem with the manner in which they protested on this occasion ie putting people in danger


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1417
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    Nobody here is denying them their right to protest.
    jimboblep wrote: »
    never claimed i had a problem with protest i have a problem with the manner in which they protested on this occasion ie putting people in danger

    People got hurt at civil rights marches in the North, 13 people died at one.
    If they hadn't been there then nobody would have been hurt.
    Apply the same to most society changing protests across the world.

    Should the organisers be in jail?


  • Options
    #1418
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    People got hurt at civil rights marches in the North, 13 people died at one.
    If they hadn't been there then nobody would have been hurt.
    Apply the same to most society changing protests across the world.

    Should the organisers be in jail?

    if the organisers forced them to break the law and placed them in danger yes they should
    and in this case the organisers chose to break the law and were punished as you already agreed was right and proper


  • Options
    #1419
    ProfessorPlum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,803 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    People got hurt at civil rights marches in the North, 13 people died at one.
    If they hadn't been there then nobody would have been hurt.
    Apply the same to most society changing protests across the world.

    Should the organisers be in jail?

    Relevance?

    Why would the organisers be in Jail? did they break the law in organising the march?
    D'arcy didn't (just) orgainise the protest, she broke the law. Therefore, she is guilty and must serve the sentence. Anybody who broke the law at the above marches is also at the 'mercy' of the law. So what.


  • Options
    #1420
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    jimboblep wrote: »
    if the organisers forced them to break the law and placed them in danger yes they should
    and in this case the organisers chose to break the law and were punished as you already agreed was right and proper

    The marches where frequently 'banned' therefore illegal.
    The march that ended in Bloody Sunday was banned too iirc


  • Options
    #1421
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    Relevance?

    Why would the organisers be in Jail? did they break the law in organising the march?
    .

    Yes, the marches were banned.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1422
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    If people didn't protest because they think it's too risky I think there would be a lot less protest,
    For instance in Russia at the moment if you organise a protest against the 'gay propaganda law' you are arrested under the 'gay propaganda law'.


  • Options
    #1423
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    The marches where frequently 'banned' therefore illegal.
    The march that ended in Bloody Sunday was banned too iirc

    ah i see your trying to justify what ms darcy did by comparing it to bloody sunday your attempts at factual debate have been disproved so time to use the emotive language
    you really cant stick to a point can you


  • Options
    #1424
    ProfessorPlum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,803 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Yes, the marches were banned.

    So then, like I already said, they are at the mercy of the law.
    Are you trying to compare d'arcy to the civil rights marches up north?
    Last time I checked it was perfectly legal and relatively easy to organise a march here - why didn't she do that.
    This is going round in circles and not getting anywhere. I'm out.


  • Options
    #1425
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    Shakti wrote: »
    If people didn't protest because they think it's too risky I think there would be a lot less protest,
    For instance in Russia at the moment if you organise a protest against the 'gay propaganda law' you are arrested under the 'gay propaganda law'.

    and if people wish to protest in that situation thats their perogative but its not their right to endanger others


  • Options
    #1426
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    jimboblep wrote: »
    ah i see your trying to justify what ms darcy did by comparing it to bloody sunday your attempts at factual debate have been disproved so time to use the emotive language
    you really cant stick to a point can you

    No, Shakti has posed a few questions, merely joining in.

    Should the organisers of the Bloody Sunday be in jail and where they morally wrong?
    People knew that there was a high posibility of the marches being attacked but still went ahead.


  • Options
    #1427
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    I'm out.

    I thought so. :D


  • Options
    #1428
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    jimboblep wrote: »
    and if people wish to protest in that situation thats their perogative but its not their right to endanger others

    The legislation indicates they are putting minors at risk,


  • Options
    #1429
    The Rad Runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88 ✭✭The Rad Runner


    Fair play prof plumb, hopefully jimbo and bumper will follow suit.
    let it die. the race for the last word is leading people to be used by looney lefties.
    and for that reason.....i'm out


  • Options
    #1430
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    No, Shakti has posed a few questions, merely joining in.

    Should the organisers of the Bloody Sunday be in jail and where they morally wrong?
    People knew that there was a high posibility of the marches being attacked but still went ahead.

    if you knew a march was going to be fired on would you send unarmed people out to be shot would that be moral to you


  • Options
    #1431
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    So then, like I already said, they are at the mercy of the law.
    Are you trying to compare d'arcy to the civil rights marches up north?
    Last time I checked it was perfectly legal and relatively easy to organise a march here - why didn't she do that.
    This is going round in circles and not getting anywhere. I'm out.

    And by the way, M. D'Arcy has organised many marches and protests and just like the Civil Rights marches has not been listened to so under her committment to the Nurenberg Principle (just like the Civil RIghts marchers) they are going to the next stage, 'breaking the law' which is their 'duty' to do.
    So, yes, comparisons are completely legitimate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1432
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    The Rad Runner wrote: »
    Fair play prof plumb, hopefully jimbo and bumper will follow suit.
    let it die. the race for the last word is leading people to be used by looney lefties.
    and for that reason.....i'm out

    you know your right he can have the last word if it means that much all his ridiculous arguments have one by one been disproved im out


  • Options
    #1433
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    jimboblep wrote: »
    if you knew a march was going to be fired on would you send unarmed people out to be shot would that be moral to you
    I think you where asked a question first,

    Should the organisers have been jailed, they broke the law by marching and knew that the marchers would most likely be attacked like before.


  • Options
    #1434
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Where have all the moral absolutists gone?

    Somebody must have asked a hard question. ;)

    I'm flying on a trip tomorrow, the sudden exits will entertain me no end. Night.


  • Options
    #1435
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    I thought that was a pretty good debate from both sides mostly


  • Options
    #1436
    dxhound2005
    Registered Users Posts: 20,808 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    Shakti wrote: »
    I thought that was a pretty good debate from both sides mostly

    I think the highlight was Post #2. It went downhill after that.

    Crazy auld bat, best place for her.


  • Options
    #1437
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    i said 'mostly'


  • Options
    #1438
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Shakti wrote: »
    I thought that was a pretty good debate from both sides mostly

    Funny at the end there.
    I found it curious that there seems be a blindspot when it came to aviation. Society-changing protests frequently end in violence that people (including organisers) knew would happen.
    They all bailed out when they had to apply the same moral reasoning to Civil Rights and the Russia protests. As I say, curious.


  • Options
    #1439
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    I think you where asked a question first,

    Should the organisers have been jailed, they broke the law by marching and knew that the marchers would most likely be attacked like before.

    Surely if they believed that the innocent people whom joined their protest could be attack or killed then they had a moral responsibility to call it off. And yes if there was a law banning the organising of a protest then the people organising one should have to face the consequences of their actions.


  • Options
    #1440
    jimboblep
    Registered Users Posts: 546 ✭✭✭jimboblep


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Funny at the end there.
    I found it curious that there seems be a blindspot when it came to aviation. Society-changing protests frequently end in violence that people (including organisers) knew would happen.
    They all bailed out when they had to apply the same moral reasoning to Civil Rights and the Russia protests. As I say, curious.

    I got out because i got fed up of arguing with a zealot but you will find i answered your question pathetic attempt as it was to pull on the heart strings i was glad to leave it but your childish gloating at a "victory" is sad
    You first stated their was no danger you were proved wrong and admitted it now you can deny that but the posts are there
    Dont talk about avoiding questions you have been a gutless coward throughout avoiding and deflecting any awqward question put to you and resorting to snide remarks like a petulant child
    At the end of it all a criminal is in jail where she should
    Reply all you want to this im done i just want it on the record what a sad pathetic loser you are
    And its worth a ban


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1441
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    jimboblep wrote: »
    I got out because i got fed up of arguing with a zealot but you will find i answered your question pathetic attempt as it was to pull on the heart strings i was glad to leave it but your childish gloating at a "victory" is sad
    You first stated their was no danger you were proved wrong and admitted it now you can deny that but the posts are there
    Dont talk about avoiding questions you have been a gutless coward throughout avoiding and deflecting any awqward question put to you and resorting to snide remarks like a petulant child
    At the end of it all a criminal is in jail where she should
    Reply all you want to this im done i just want it on the record what a sad pathetic loser you are
    And its worth a ban

    Pull on the heart strings? It was an internet debate man, not a life and death duel. Jesus H, the pathos.
    You will have to show what questions I didn't answer, and then review all the stuff I was asking and was met with fuzzy answers and patent lies that could be seen by anybody with an ounce of reason.
    I may not have been right but I was prepared to fight my corner, then when the moral absolutists got asked a difficult moral question they jumped ship like cowardly rats rather than admit that sometimes life ain't that easy and cut and dried. Dry your tears, nobody died in here.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement