Shell to Sea protestor believes more Gardai should be run over and killed by cars

cushtac

Profiler wrote: »

No, the comments are made at what appear to be private security people. I didn't see any members of AGS in that video.

That doesn't mean they weren't there. Considering it was a Garda that was killed in Donegal and not a security guard, it's logical to assume she's talking to a Garda.

eroo

Thankfully nobody takes these people seriously.

If her house is broken into.. who is she going to call? It sure as hell wont be the Rossport Five!

hedges

eroo wrote: »

Thankfully nobody takes these people seriously.

If her house is broken into.. who is she going to call? It sure as hell wont be the Rossport Five!

Sorry in advance

Maybe she shoud try Ghost Busters !!!


The funny thing is that no matter what she has said, I have no doubt that the gardai wont hesitate to respond to her call for assistance.

The gardai still manage to rise above the *********** (im not going to finish that sentence)

sdanseo

bushy... wrote: »

I disabled comments to stop shell to sea loons adding the usual pages of comments along the lines of "teh evil shell are paying off everyone"

Whoops, fair nuff.

O'Coonassa

happyhappy wrote: »

you have no idea what goes on in the real world. no idea.

where do you draw the line??
its ok to laugh and make insulting comments about an incident where a garda was killed only a few weeks ago because sticks and stones and all that!! so section 6 of the public order act shouldn't exist.

by your logic anyone can threaten to kill or seriously harm someone else.
so threats to kill contrary to section 5 of the non fatal offences against the person act 1997 shouldn't exist because of sticks and stones and all that??

the same goes for the incitment to hatred act, other sections of the public order act, and other common law offences off the top of my head. but its all ok because of sticks and stones and all that!

imagine the court case:
barrister: m'lud my client is clearly not guilty, he only SAID he would have the injured party shot if he gave evidence at an alleged trial! however, due to the O'coonassa principle of 'sticks and stones and all that' he should be found to be not guilty as he never actually shot him, he only threatened he would!

mods, sorry for slightly off topic rant! i'm finished now!!

Lol you're somehwat out of context here if you revisit the post I was replying to. Furthermore I don't think the woman threatened anybody did she? She merely engaged in some obnoxious wishful thinking. That and making threats are two different things in the real world.

Whitewater-AGS

She's scum and that's putting it nicely:mad:

lordgoat

Whitewater-AGS wrote: »

She's scum and that's putting it nicely:mad:

That comment is way over the line and imo makes you almost as bad as she...

I'm shocked by that womans comments. In theory i do support the shell to sea campaign but after watching their tactics i am extremely saddened by them. From being from reasonably close to that area i feel incredibly let down by what she said and think the gardi/security did themselves proud in that particular clip.

maglite

What security firm is it.

They look like nice jackets.

Shows up the average IQ of the protesters calling Security people Gardai and aribs. Gee aren't they smart. One has to admire the well rounded and constructive arguments they propose

Shield

Alright we've all had our say. Let's leave it there shall we?

Closed.