Wheelchair user refused entry to Dublin Nightclub.

Kenny Logins

Boombastic wrote: »

Olan is also on the board of the Irish Wheelchair Association who were sued in January for discriminating against deaf people

Wheelchair body pays €10,000 for discrimination

A dead body in a wheelchair dats DISGRACEFULL you shud be ASHAMED yerself an we shud burn dis kip down.




Oops, my apologies. I thought I was on Facebook there.

Duck's hoop

orestes wrote: »

I think you're mixing up criticised and questioned, and everything should be fair game to be questioned. Nothing (opinion, action, or anything else) should ever be considered beyond scrutiny. Otherwise we would just have to take everybodies word for everything, which would be a complete disaster because people can be dishonest, self-serving, lying, deceitful, and naughty.

I'm as cynical a cnut as you could meet. But I posted in reply to a post which essentially criticised one of the 2 chair users for praising Belfast as being progressive in its accessibility. Pointing out that rebuilding probably allowed an element of accessibility to be factored in.

It just seemed a little OTT.

Fwiw I been to Belfast plenty and not really noticed it a huge lot better than other cities. But there are a lot worse for sure.

starlings

Duck's hoop wrote: »

I'm as cynical a cnut as you could meet. But I posted in reply to a post which essentially criticised one of the 2 chair users for praising Belfast as being progressive in its accessibility. Pointing out that rebuilding probably allowed an element of accessibility to be factored in.

It just seemed a little OTT.

Fwiw I been to Belfast plenty and not really noticed it a huge lot better than other cities. But there are a lot worse for sure.

"Pointing out that rebuilding probably allowed an element of accessibility to be factored in."

what on earth is wrong with that? I didn't criticise Olan; I said it was interesting that the article didn't point this out. Implicitly - and now explicitly - I'm saying that without this detail a comparison of Dublin and Belfast in terms of accessibility is incomplete.

I'm looking at this as a problem-solver btw, not a cynic, and the comparison seems important when the case in point involves an old building with a complicated balance of regulations for both heritage and contemporary use.

And it's skeptical to ask questions, but cynical to assume the worst.

wtlltw

starlings wrote: »

I'm saying that without this detail a comparison of Dublin and Belfast in terms of accessibility is incomplete.

Northern Ireland (like the UK) had the DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) introduced in 1995 and came into force in 2005 - they had a good head start in ensuring buildings were accessible. Their Building Regs Part M (Part R in NI) covered accessibility in a wider spectrum until TGD M 2010 was introduced. Saying that I still can't see a huge improvement regarding accessibility, it all depends on the building type and the space available to make suitable adaptations.

Duck's hoop

starlings wrote: »

And it's skeptical to ask questions, but cynical to assume the worst.

Lots of cynics on this thread then.

starlings

Duck's hoop wrote: »

Lots of cynics on this thread then.

They are everywhere!

skimpydoo

starlings wrote: »

They are everywhere!

I just spotted 2 earlier

JRant

Ronan Leonard wrote: »

I just spotted 2 earlier

You need to keep an eye on them, they'd have the fillings outta your teeth given half the chance

md23040

It looks like Bolger is keeping stum and possibly getting lawyered up according to his earlier FB comments to his mates. He works in the music business, so is there a gripe against Mc Killen who owns the premises and just seen ka-ching ka-ching money signs from the little escapade, or is it aimed towards his more famous business partner.

The lawsuit against Searsons by a colleague is just plain spiteful and the clique look like a bunch of embittered militant wheelchair users out to exercise their rights in this free money grabbing blame cultured society.

Next time I'm in a pub or restaurant without bog roll to wipe my soft little bottom maybe there's money in it with a solicitor for grieve and distress etc. The possibilities are mind boggling and endless.

Hope you go to court and the operators don’t back down. Then we'd all see and hear the video tape from outside the club to what actually happened in those 45 minutes and whether you're a lying and you're friends threw a hissy.

Notwithstanding that the venue could probably sue you for the vitriol that has been stoked up through Facebook and your unexplainable inability to quell the situation after the apology and someone getting fired. You could possibly be held responsible for the slanderous remarks that ensued on a public forum like Facebook since anything you wrote on Facebook can be held as a public statement by law and occured on your wall, therefore you can be counter sued for slander and defamation caused to their business and its reputation.

If this business can take on the likes of the Barclay Brothers in a multimillion London High Court case, then hopefully, should you legally pull the first move hopefully they'll quash you like a fly until the pips squeak.

The internet is a great source of information when you google deeper.

Also should you tried to sue, suggest they use that horrible YouTube video from New York (think) that shows what can happen to a nightclub in nine minutes after fire broke out, and the repercussions of a plonker like you stuck in a confined and crowded space without proper means of escape.

Mate they did you a favour recognising you as a danger, and whoever mentioned on this thread about when they go into pubs, cinema, restaurants etc and look for the fire escapes first has done me a favour too. Thanks for that.

Czarcasm

Duck's hoop wrote: »

Lots of cynics on this thread then.

I was one of the early cynics on this thread when I saw how the photo was posed (would've been a better sympathy getter if his girlfriend hadn't photobombed it!) and the way in the last line of the post he had something along the lines of-

"you've just stepped in the ring with one very determined person".

That last line should have read-

"you've just stepped in the ring with one very bitter person".


This was all before the digging was done, and I hadn't even seen the whole thing on facebook nor did I know anything about "Graham", which is why I initially thought "Ahh here OP would you ever give the man a bit of dignity instead of plastering his face all over the internet!"

Turned out a couple of hours later (I didn't know this because I'm not on facebook) that getting his face plastered all over the internet was exactly what "Graham" wanted.


I know you might think there's a "boards hate campaign" going on as it would buy into Graham's "I'm a victiiiim" complex, but really, there isn't. Posters here are questioning the whole story from all angles, not just clicking a stupid "like" button "because it's the cool thing to do and well done for sticking it to the man".

I can only speak for myself and not any perceived "hate mob" when I say that in my opinion, Graham, as a now public figure, is a publicity hungry shameless little shìtebag who has negated all his past achievements in my eyes with this latest malicious publicity stunt.

He has not done disabled people any favors by his actions and now I and my friend risk having security staff pause for thought before they allow us entry to an establishment whereas before they wouldn't have looked twice at us. They will now fear that like Graham we too are publicity hungry little shìtes looking for our five seconds of fame on the internet and will be well within their rights to refuse us entry on health and safety grounds.


Nice one Graham. Fùcking assclown.

Duck's hoop

md23040 wrote: »

It looks like Bolger is keeping stum and possibly getting lawyered up according to his earlier FB comments to his mates. He works in the music business, so is there a gripe against Mc Killen who owns the premises and just seen ka-ching ka-ching money signs from the little escapade, or is it aimed towards his more famous business partner.

The lawsuit against Searsons by a colleague is just plain spiteful and the clique look like a bunch of embittered militant wheelchair users out to exercise their rights in this free money grabbing blame cultured society.

Next time I'm in a pub or restaurant without bog roll to wipe my soft little bottom maybe there's money in it with a solicitor for grieve and distress etc. The possibilities are mind boggling and endless.

Hope you go to court and the operators don’t back down. Then we'd all see and hear the video tape from outside the club to what actually happened in those 45 minutes and whether you're a lying and you're friends threw a hissy.

Notwithstanding that the venue could probably sue you for the vitriol that has been stoked up through Facebook and your unexplainable inability to quell the situation after the apology and someone getting fired. You could possibly be held responsible for the slanderous remarks that ensued on a public forum like Facebook since anything you wrote on Facebook can be held as a public statement by law and occured on your wall, therefore you can be counter sued for slander and defamation caused to their business and its reputation.

If this business can take on the likes of the Barclay Brothers in a multimillion London High Court case, then hopefully, should you legally pull the first move hopefully they'll quash you like a fly until the pips squeak.

The internet is a great source of information when you google deeper.

Also should you tried to sue, suggest they use that horrible YouTube video from New York (think) that shows what can happen to a nightclub in nine minutes after fire broke out, and the repercussions of a plonker like you stuck in a confined and crowded space without proper means of escape.

Mate they did you a favour recognising you as a danger, and whoever mentioned on this thread about when they go into pubs, cinema, restaurants etc and look for the fire escapes first has done me a favour too. Thanks for that.

Fcuking hell. How do you people know so much about all these various cases? Or is it maybe mere hearsay and conjecture?

For a thread that turned into a free for all rant against a Facebook witch hunt and baseless and unfounded allegations, it hasn't half turned into a witch hunt filled with unfounded allegations.

The irony in some of these posts is class.

md23040

Duck's hoop wrote: »

Fcuking hell. How do you people know so much about all these various cases? Or is it maybe mere hearsay and conjecture?

For a thread that turned into a free for all rant against a Facebook witch hunt and baseless and unfounded allegations, it hasn't half turned into a witch hunt filled with unfounded allegations.

The irony in some of these posts is class.

Which parts of my post are hearsay and conjecture as everything mentioned are stated facts out there? Bolger mentioned on Facebook about consulting a lawyer so we can only extrapolate his intentions. Slander against a business’s reputation is a serious matter when a vendor has committed to a lease and spent tens of thousands of euro fitting out new premises. These matters surely you understand should/must be protected too?

Duck's hoop are you a cheerleader for this guy - you seem generally dismissive? My apologises for not reading the other 20 pages previous to determine, but just the cynical and paranoid nature in me with the spidey senses.

starlings

Duck's hoop is making a fair point about the way this thread is getting angrier.

LizT

Let's leave it there, people are getting unnecessarily personal now.