Denis O'Brien, Catherine Murphy and the threatening lawsuit letters....

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Where is the same level of outrage at social welfare fraud?...which is also the thieving of taxpayers money. Double standards propped up by begrudgery.

That's the silliest post I've ever read. There are countless threads about the dole, almost daily, up to and including social welfare fraud.

This thread is about Denis O'Brien btw tbh.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Does not matter how many abuse welfare. It is theft of our money. Rich or poor should get equal justice and punishment.

Agreed.

foggy_lad

It is time for the people to just stay in bed on Monday morning and Fúch the government and their master O'Brien.

No more will we have the jumbo Cowan topaz breakfast roll and bottle of Irish Water in the morning on the way to work as the general strike starts Monday.




























Oh ****e lads, The general strike organised for Monday has been postponed due to the bank Holiday.

Kermit.de.frog

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Social welfare fraud is horrible, but this is a case where one man unfairly kept millions which should have gone to the govt.; one social welfare dodger is not equitable to this.

Theft is theft. It is absolutely the same.

You come across like that silly jesuit in Dublin who thinks it's perfectly fine for little howiyeahs to thieve and rob because, god love them, they have not got their lot in life. Denis O'Brien is only being targeted really because he is a billionaire.

Chucken

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

That's the silliest post I've ever read. There are countless threads about the dole, almost daily, up to and including social welfare fraud.

This thread is about Denis O'Brien btw tbh.

Well...It's about censorship really

Amazing how 1 man can have so much power isn't it?

Jayzes, he wasn't even elected!!!

darkpagandeath

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Theft is theft. It is absolutely the same.

You come across like that silly jesuit in Dublin who thinks it's perfectly fine for little howiyeahs to thieve and rob because, god love them, they have not got their lot in life. Denis O'Brien is only being targeted really because he is a billionaire.

Really ?

hatrickpatrick

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Theft is theft. It is absolutely the same.

You come across like that silly jesuit in Dublin who thinks it's perfectly fine for little howiyeahs to thieve and rob because, god love them, they have not got their lot in life. Denis O'Brien is only being targeted really because he is a billionaire.

Assault is assault. However there's a difference between punching someone in the nose because you find him in bed with your girlfriend, and beating thousands of passers-by to a bloody pulp for no reason other than your own amusement.

silverfeather

billy few mates wrote: »

People of Malta aren't called "Maltesians..."

Maltesers?

darkpagandeath

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Assault is assault. However there's a difference between punching someone in the nose because you find him in bed with your girlfriend, and beating thousands of passers-by to a bloody pulp for no reason other than your own amusement.

I think we are being led into making comments that could lead to liability don't bite.

MightyMandarin

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Theft is theft. It is absolutely the same.

You come across like that silly jesuit in Dublin who thinks it's perfectly fine for little howiyeahs to thieve and rob because, god love them, they have not got their lot in life. Denis O'Brien is only being targeted really because he is a billionaire.

I think you'll find that there are degrees to crimes, with various factors in even the most serious of crimes. To equate one social welfare scammer to a man who has cost the state hundreds of millions, is foolish imo.

And I don't begrudge the man for his wealth. He is a smart businessman, and if I knew that doing a couple of sh*tty things would make me a multi-billionaire, I'd do them too. But he has cheated his way out paying millions in this scenario, and for that he should be criticised.

Schrodingers

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Theft is theft. It is absolutely the same.

You come across like that silly jesuit in Dublin who thinks it's perfectly fine for little howiyeahs to thieve and rob because, god love them, they have not got their lot in life.

You are just trying to take this thread off topic and turn it into a dole bashing thread to get it locked

Those committing social welfare fraud are arrested with alot less evidence compared to Denis oBrien who bribed a government official to get a contract and has many dodgy dealing with government appointed agencies. The same government he deals on a personal level with, plenty of skeletons in the closet.

Denis O Brien will never seen the inside of a court room let alone a jail cell for what he has done as he controls the government and even if questioned by the guards he will not allow it to be made public by using the media he owns to keep it quiet and his legal team to stop other media outlets mentioning it

silverfeather

They are both very very bad. Lets talk about one at a time in separate threads. nite

Chucken

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Where is the same level of outrage at social welfare fraud?...which is also the thieving of taxpayers money. Double standards propped up by begrudgery.

Are you saying that your hero is a thief?

Junkyard Tom

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Rich or poor should get equal justice and punishment.

They don't you see. The fraud of the plebs is punishable by prison. The fraud of the rich is just a consequence of the rigged game.

Go to bed.

Kermit.de.frog

He has rights like everyone else and it seems to me he is upholding his rights not to have remarks made about him that are defamatory. Most here would do exactly the same if some upstart in the dail tried denegrate them in public.

darkpagandeath

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

He has rights like everyone else and it seems to me he is upholding his rights not to have remarks made about him that are defamatory. Most here would do exactly the same if some upstart in the dail tried denegrate them in public.

Is there a case lodged in the courts to say this ?

foggy_lad

Chucken wrote: »

Well...It's about censorship really

Amazing how 1 man can have so much power isn't it?

Jayzes, he wasn't even elected!!!

Denis the menace or Kermit?

Schrodingers

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

He has rights like everyone else and it seems to me he is upholding his rights not to have remarks made about him that are defamatory. Most here would do exactly the same if some upstart in the dail tried denegrate them in public.

And if the government werent involved in Garda appointments or judicial appointments then CAB could do their job and he would have the Right to remain silent

Chucken

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

He has rights like everyone else and it seems to me he is upholding his rights not to have remarks made about him that are defamatory. Most here would do exactly the same if some upstart in the dail tried denegrate them in public.

An elected representative?

:pac: Now us plebs see what your agenda is :pac::pac::pac:

Junkyard Tom

Chucken wrote: »

An elected representative?

:pac: Now us plebs see what your agenda is :pac::pac::pac:

This disposition to admire, and almost to worship, the rich and the powerful, and to despise, or, at least, to neglect persons of poor and mean condition, though necessary both to establish and to maintain the distinction of ranks and the order of society, is, at the same time, the great and most universal cause of the corruption of our moral sentiments.

Adam Smith (The Father of Capitalism)

.

Chucken

Here Kermit. Tell us where Catherine defamed your hero.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cT3KLVWc5tk

Waitsian

foggy_lad wrote:

Denis the menace or Kermit?

I'm beginning to think they're the same person!

Smiles35

Dennis Taylor or Dennis Rodman?

Chucken

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Theft is theft. It is absolutely the same.

You come across like that silly jesuit in Dublin who thinks it's perfectly fine for little howiyeahs to thieve and rob because, god love them, they have not got their lot in life. Denis O'Brien is only being targeted really because he is a billionaire.

Sorry, I meant to address this nugget earlier.

This is Kermut at his best. Not realising that there's a whole other world outside Dublin.

A world where we look out for each other...which includes looking out for people we have never seen or met.

foggy_lad

mod9maple wrote: »

I'm beginning to think they're the same person!

More like Mr Wilson.

I had a big long post typed out with references to the illegal A1 waste dump in Naas that burned underground for months and was that where the DOB skeletons were buried? Whatnhold does he have over the likes of biffo and ends and how is he able to control high court judges who were solicitors not so long ago? Loads more questions but I decided they were best sent to conspiracy theories.

darkpagandeath

Chucken wrote: »

Sorry, I meant to address this nugget earlier.

This is Kermut at his best. Not realising that there's a whole other world outside Dublin.

A world where we look out for each other...which includes looking out for people we have never seen or met.

And foreigners like me living the nightmare.

Chucken

darkpagandeath wrote: »

And foreigners like me living the nightmare.

http://www.maniacworld.com/internet-high-five.jpg

Ya foreigner ya!

Nodin

DeVore wrote: »

Wow... they even made a film of it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cT3KLVWc5tk

I always knew the talkin movin pictures would come in handy sooner or later.

Nodin

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

He has rights like everyone else and it seems to me he is upholding his rights not to have remarks made about him that are defamatory. Most here would do exactly the same if some upstart in the dail tried denegrate them in public.

You're right.

*sob

I'm sorry Mr O'Brien, with your track record of never being convicted of anything I should have known better than to join in with the mob.

*sniff

I just keep think of his poor roundy face, contorted and dripping tears of rage.....the poor dear thing.....

Kermit.de.frog

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

He has rights like everyone else and it seems to me he is upholding his rights not to have remarks made about him that are defamatory. Most here would do exactly the same if some upstart in the dail tried denegrate them in public.

How about the right of TDs to Dail privilege, set out in Article 15.13? Their right to make utterances without people like O'Brien or indeed you lobbing in the defamation whine? Why would you not uphold that right?

abff

Apologies if this is a stupid question or if it's already been addressed on this thread, but is the fact that something is true not a defense against libel?

I know there's a distinction between knowing something to be true and proving it, but has anyone specifically denied that what Catherine Murphy said was true?

JustTheOne

Anything to be said for him denying the allegations?

Or are we going with guilty straightaway?

Genuine question.

JustTheOne

JustTheOne wrote: »

Anything to be said for him denying the allegations?

Or are we going with guilty straightaway?

Genuine question.

It's fair to say he has form.

But it's always possible that this time he didn't pull any stroke. He may have turned over a new leaf since the damning Tribunal findings. It's just a pity he seeks to shut down debate, if he has nothing to hide...

Banjo String

JustTheOne wrote: »

Anything to be said for him denying the allegations?

Or are we going with guilty straightaway?

Genuine question.

http://i.imgur.com/2wkXy1r.jpg

RecordStraight

Tony EH wrote: »

Funny...none of the usual suspects running to Dinny's rescue on Boards?

It must be late.

I suppose there must be some people out there who are motivated by principle, rather than by defending their 'side' whether they are right or wrong.

Personally, as I've said, if the law has been broken I hope to see people banged up. I don't care what political party or public figures are involved.

buckfasterer

Not a peep on any radio stations that I heard this morning about this story anyway. Gagging order and fear well and truly enacted. Makes me sick in my stomach that this is happening and he's able to get away with it.

frostyjacks

buckfasterer wrote: »

Not a peep on any radio stations that I heard this morning about this story anyway. Gagging order and fear well and truly enacted. Makes me sick in my stomach that this is happening and he's able to get away with it.

Yeah, newstalk glossed over it just now. Spent more time talking on one of the silly stories.

RecordStraight

buckfasterer wrote: »

Not a peep on any radio stations that I heard this morning about this story anyway. Gagging order and fear well and truly enacted. Makes me sick in my stomach that this is happening and he's able to get away with it.

O'Brien owns a lot of your favourite stations. RTE covered it in some depth just now on Morning Ireland.

Jimoslimos

Banjo String wrote: »

If only he hadn't gagged the media from reporting (to the public) on the actual details of his 'private banking affairs' from a state owned bank, he'd have no bother making the public believe this.

This is what has been niggling me.

He was granted the injunction based on the fact that his private banking details were not in the public interest. Nothing to do with it being false.

So that being said he cannot go waving his privacy injunction ruling about and threaten every media organisation with it whilst also claiming that Deputy Murphy's information was false. If it is then surely it differs from what was in the original RTÈ report.

Redbishop

Jimoslimos wrote: »

This is what has been niggling me.

He was granted the injunction based on the fact that his private banking details were not in the public interest. Nothing to do with it being false.

So that being said he cannot go waving his privacy injunction ruling about and threaten every media organisation with it whilst also claiming that Deputy Murphy's information was false. If it is then surely it differs from what was in the original RTÈ report.

Its a tough one to argue for me. There are questions for sure regarding the siteserv deal. Previous history does not necessarily make him or anyone else guilty of anything in the present.
Are there any other deals regarding him that are questionable? If you say that the banking issues surrounding siteserv should be made public with regards to clarity and to see if the deal is legit or not then maybe that should happen. But does that then give up the right to delve through every single banking arrangement throughout his whole business? Surely the best way to go about it is for an independent judicial review behind closed doors, done quickly and the findings of that made public without prejudice to DOB if no wrongdoing is found and made public and criminal charges to be brought if any illegal dealings are found. It is up to the law to establish if there is anything illegal going on and trial by media and public opinion can often lead to lynch mob justice and be used solely for political gain which is the way I personally see this heading.

Oryx

Anything done behind closed doors is dubious. Any investigation has to be public. Theyve hidden too much already.

Redbishop

Oryx wrote: »

Anything done behind closed doors is dubious. Any investigation has to be public. Theyve hidden too much already.

The public does not have the right to know anyones banking arrangements if there is no wrongdoing. To suggest otherwise is to agree that everyones banking arrangements should be a matter of public record. You cant discriminate just because he is DOB.

Oryx

Redbishop wrote: »

The public does not have the right to know anyones banking arrangements if there is no wrongdoing. To suggest otherwise is to agree that everyones banking arrangements should be a matter of public record. You cant discriminate just because he is DOB.

The key thing. Wrongdoing. You are asking the same parties to possible collusion to investigate without public scrutiny.

Redbishop

Oryx wrote: »

The key thing. Wrongdoing. You are asking the same parties to possible collusion to investigate without public scrutiny.

Not so. I am asking the judiciary to decide. Even the Gardai or the DPP.

Oryx

Redbishop wrote: »

Not so. I am asking the judiciary to decide. Even the Gardai or the DPP.

Such decisions should be transparent.

VinLieger

Banjo String wrote: »

This thread is not about Greece, Sinn Fein, or any other cute distraction.

I didn't bring up greece was simply responding to someone who did, but thanks for trying to point finger's very grown up of you

Redbishop

Oryx wrote: »

Such decisions should be transparent.

Why? If no wrong doing is found by any of the investigators I have mentioned why has anyone the right to know of personal banking arrangements. Unless you question the impartiality of the judiciary, Gardai and the DPP. Surely by right everyone has the right to some privacy if there is nothing criminal going on. If after investigation there are charges brought or even adverse findings, then the public have the right to know.

keeponhurling

Tony EH wrote: »

Funny...none of the usual suspects running to Dinny's rescue on Boards?

It must be late.

FG-bots to your keyboards please
Repeat, FG-bots please proceed to your keyboards immediately

Jazus, Lads. Ye're gas! Clutching at straws now. The good ould begrudgery is alive and kicking, even in Dail Eireann. So, Denis O'Brien is a good businessman who drives a hard bargain. So What? So do Dunnes Stores, Tesco and I'm sure Lidl and Aldi. It's called economy of scale. The more you buy, the lower the cost. Simples! I haven't read the whole 17 pages, as work calls. I doubt her figure of 7.5%. Mortgages can be had for 3.7% interest.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Redbishop wrote: »

Why? If no wrong doing is found by any of the investigators I have mentioned why has anyone the right to know of personal banking arrangements. Unless you question the impartiality of the judiciary, Gardai and the DPP. Surely by right everyone has the right to some privacy if there is nothing criminal going on. If after investigation there are charges brought or even adverse findings, then the public have the right to know.

Any personal banking arrangements that could involve preferential treatment of an individual by a taxpayer funded bank gives everyone a right to know.