Truck incident at Leinster House

Snakeblood

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

That's the craziest statement I've heard. rarely been paid that much as a qualified engineer. You sure you're in the right country?

ye-ep. Do you have another figure? I'm open to correction.

JONJO THE MISER

Joe saves the day again:D

Phill Ewinn

Snakeblood wrote: »

ye-ep. Do you have another figure? I'm open to correction.

Speaking as someone who works on contract, I can tell you that semi-skilled employees (average enough?) are lucky to be offered €25k.

Slidey

OisinT wrote: »

By the sounds of it, the truck stopped after hitting the gates, he jumped out of the sunroof thing and down the plank over the top.
Not sure where the brake line is in those things, but doubtful it's accessible in the cabin?

Regardless of this, he used his vehicle as a weapon or attempted to use it as a weapon. This stunt was dangerous no matter how you slice it and was excessive for the publicity stunt he was trying to create.

Seriously, you haven't a clue. The handbrake valve is in the cab and the airlines going to it would be right there in the cab.

If there was no brakes they wouldn't have had so much trouble towing it away.

That truck would weigh in or around 13t empty. If it ran into the gates it would go through them and if it didn't it would bounce back and would not stop for a fair distance

Snakeblood

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Speaking as someone who works on contract, I can tell you that semi-skilled employees (average enough?) are lucky to be offered €25k.

That's not really average enough, sorry. That's your personal experience of your line of work, not an average.

mumfordandsons

Snakeblood wrote: »

That's not really average enough, sorry. That's your personal experience of your line of work, not an average.

you are being very stupid , cop on.

FreudianSlippers

Slidey wrote: »

Seriously, you haven't a clue. The handbrake valve is in the cab and the airlines going to it would be right there in the cab.

If there was no brakes they wouldn't have had so much trouble towing it away.

That truck would weigh in or around 13t empty. If it ran into the gates it would go through them and if it didn't it would bounce back and would not stop for a fair distance

I'm just saying what they said on RTÉ radio news this morning. I don't know about driving a truck... jesus sorry.

No need to be such a prick

Mod note: Poster banned for this comment.

mumfordandsons

Kersh wrote: »

@ Mumfordand sons - Anyone who stood on the lawn of a semi-d house in suburbia and paid 600-700k for it and thought it was worth that is a complete looper and deserves their negative equity.

For the record, I almost did, but backed out at the last, cos I didnt think the house (albeit out in the country) was worth 400k. I was smart. And so it proves - the same houses are up fpr 179k and not selling.

I dont work for the government, or bank or anything like that. I just didnt get caught up in the whole property thing.

In fact I spent my deposit money on a classic car for £22k and its now appreciating nicely to the tune so far of double my money.

I have rented for years, and was told it was dead money.... by the very same ppl now living in 300k houses with a 600k mortgage - now you tell me which is dead money :P

so what . read my post's correcly , i didnt buy . i rent myself.

Snakeblood

mumfordandsons wrote: »

you are being very stupid , cop on.

How do you mean? I honestly don't understand how one person's experience makes for an average.

FreudianSlippers

mumfordandsons wrote: »

you are being very stupid , cop on.

What's wrong with what he said? Saying he's being stupid and cop on is not exactly refuting his claim with evidence to the contrary.

Kersh

@Mumford (again :rolleyes: ) - I was replying to this -

how stupid are you. people had to pay the prices as they were highly inflated due to fact that goverment and banks were making hugh profits,
people had no choice but to buy if they wanted to own their home

In case you forgot what you wrote.

Its irrelevent whether you yourself rent or buy, you still made the statement.

TheZohanS

OisinT wrote: »

By the sounds of it, the truck stopped after hitting the gates, he jumped out of the sunroof thing and down the plank over the top.
Not sure where the brake line is in those things, but doubtful it's accessible in the cabin?

Regardless of this, he used his vehicle as a weapon or attempted to use it as a weapon. This stunt was dangerous no matter how you slice it and was excessive for the publicity stunt he was trying to create.

You're right, blatant terrorism, this wasn't just a protest.

They destroyed the Dail, bodies everywhere...let the US and UK send in troops to protect us!!

This is our 9/11.

Johnny Bitte

Any way, truck driver, dail, purple monkey dishwasher!

mumfordandsons

OisinT wrote: »

What's wrong with what he said? Saying he's being stupid and cop on is not exactly refuting his claim with evidence to the contrary.

oisin and snake , ive seen for posts u have same option.
keep backing up each other here , good on ya.
if you dont want to read the posts that being posted here dont.
to make it simple for you, what snake blood is saying is rubish ,
facts dont add up , and website dont always do or conform to
what they say on the tin!!!!

FreudianSlippers

TheZohan wrote: »

You're right, blatant terrorism, this wasn't just a protest.

They destroyed the Dail, bodies everywhere...let the US and UK send in troops to protect us!!

This is our 9/11.

So attempted murder is also ok by that reasoning since no one actually got murdered? :rolleyes:

Snakeblood

mumfordandsons wrote: »

oisin and snake , ive seen for posts u have same option.
keep backing up each other here , good on ya.
if you dont want to read the posts that being posted here dont.
to make it simple for you, what snake blood is saying is rubish ,
facts dont add up , and website dont always do or conform to
what they say on the tin!!!!

I don't agree with him. I think the protest was a good idea, and I support it. He doesn't.

I think the sticking point is neither of us understand exactly what you are saying.

FreudianSlippers

mumfordandsons wrote: »

oisin and snake , ive seen for posts u have same option.
keep backing up each other here , good on ya.
if you dont want to read the posts that being posted here dont.
to make it simple for you, what snake blood is saying is rubish ,
facts dont add up , and website dont always do or conform to
what they say on the tin!!!!

Oh come on, you're trying to say that because you make only x amount that it must be the industrial average.

I'm just saying that Snakeblood posted the average and linked to source. You're just going "nu uh" and have nothing to support it.

I'm sorry you're not happy with your wages and they are below the industrial average, but it's facts here we're discussing.

M.J.M.C

OisinT wrote: »

No need to be such a prick

Again with all due respect, that's bad out don't you think?
No need for name calling. We're all Gents / Ladies here having a debate.

mumfordandsons

Snakeblood wrote: »

I don't agree with him. I think the protest was a good idea, and I support it. He doesn't.

I think the sticking point is neither of us understand exactly what you are saying.

who cares . start on page 1 .
finish on last page if still confused sleep on it.

mumfordandsons

M.J.M.C wrote: »

Again with all due respect, that's bad out don't you think?
No need for name calling. We're all Gents / Ladies here having a debate.

spot on

TheZohanS

OisinT wrote: »

So attempted murder is also ok by that reasoning since no one actually got murdered? :rolleyes:

To get a cement truck at that angle; square with the gates of Leinster House and perfectly aligned would have taken some skill and the driver would have had to driven it at around 5mph.

But you're right, it was a blatant murder attempt.

It was a mortar bomb!

FreudianSlippers

M.J.M.C wrote: »

Again with all due respect, that's bad out don't you think?
No need for name calling. We're all Gents / Ladies here having a debate.

I said he/she was being a prick by saying "you haven't a clue" just because I don't know about truck brakes. Which is pretty ridiculous tbh.

mumfordandsons wrote: »

who cares . start on page 1 .
finish on last page if still confused sleep on it.

This reply really makes no sense and is just avoiding the question rather than making a contribution.

godanicus

Eye witnesses said he didnt hit the gates, and there was nobody in front of him, he just drove up and parked the lorry then took the keys and stood on the cab of his lorry.
Is this not a parking offence, and should he be detained at all??????
Sources from the joe duffy show btw.

Wertz

Nice to hear that even after 75 minutes of liveline callers saying that there was no actual crash involved with the gates, Dail buildings or AGS members (and plenty of other online reports of same), that RTÉ radio news are still using the term "crashed" in relation to this incident.
If any one ever had any doubts that RTÉ are simply the media wing of the government, this should quell those doubts.
Someone should do the same above in Montrose, only this time make sure and cut the brake lines before they set off. Is micra guy available for more work?

Also annoying to see that the BBC website is still using lies quotes from O'Dowd in relation to the incident....but at least they're not claiming there was damage or an actual collision.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11434780
"As I understand it..." Yeah you "understand" f*ck all in reality, Fergus, except how to blow smoke up the arses of people stupid enough to listen to you and your colleagues. Almost as bad as the indo and their "sources close to" or "an unnamed source said"...

Gunsfortoys

Mark200 wrote: »

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68249048&postcount=213

But no doubt many people were thinking.... "You know what would help? Parking a truck outside Leinster House!!!"

That doesn’t portray a solution, you are telling us what not to do with that post. What is your solution to our woes then? Try not to give a typical politician answer as well please.

FreudianSlippers

TheZohan wrote: »

To get a cement truck at that angle; square with the gates of Leinster House and perfectly aligned would have taken some skill and the driver would have had to driven it at around 5mph.

But you're right, it was a blatant murder attempt.

It was a mortar bomb!

Possible offences contrary to Sections 52, 53, 54, 55 Road Traffic Act 1961

M.J.M.C

OisinT wrote: »

I said he/she was being a prick by saying "you haven't a clue" just because I don't know about truck brakes. Which is pretty ridiculous tbh.

So you responded by calling him/her a prick?
Fair enough it's AH here, but It'll tell you what I think is ridiculous....that you're allowed say that!

Anyway I'll leave it at that. We'll move on.
Sorry to go off-topic.

furtzy

Wertz wrote: »

Nice to hear that even after 75 minutes of liveline callers saying that there was no actual crash involved with the gates, Dail buildings or AGS members (and plenty of other online reports of same), that RTÉ radio news are still using the term "crashed" in relation to this incident.
If any one ever had any doubts that RTÉ are simply the media wing of the government, this should quell those doubts.
Someone should do the same above in Montrose, only this time make sure and cut the brake lines before they set off. Is micra guy available for more work?

Also annoying to see that the BBC website is still using lies quotes from O'Dowd in relation to the incident....but at least they're not claiming there was damage or an actual collision.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11434780
"As I understand it..." Yeah you "understand" f*ck all in reality, Fergus, except how to blow smoke up the arses of people stupid enough to listen to you and your colleagues. Almost as bad as the indo and their "sources close to" or "an unnamed source said"...

exactly...he simply parked up his truck in protest and cut the brake lines so the air brakes could not be disengaged so preventing moving it.

The "Truck crashes Dail" makes better headlines than "Truck parks up at Dail entrance"

Fair fvcks to him. At least he's doing more than complaining about things on an internet forum like the rest of us

TheZohanS

OisinT wrote: »

So attempted murder is also ok by that reasoning since no one actually got murdered? :rolleyes:

OisinT wrote: »

Possible offences contrary to Sections 52, 53, 54, 55 Road Traffic Act 1961

I see....back away from the screen OisinT.

Mark200

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

That doesn’t portray a solution, you are telling us what not to do with that post. What is your solution to our woes then? Try not to give a typical politician answer as well please.

You clearly didn't read my post properly. My suggestion:

"try to come up with actual suggestions to what the Government should do." as opposed to all this moaning without providing any alternatives to the Government's current actions.

I repeated that idea again in my post:

"How about we say what we are FOR instead of just blanketly knocking every idea the current Government comes up with?"

That's my suggestion as to how the country should be reacting to this mess... it was in response to the suggestion that parking a truck outside Leinster Parliament was helping.