Strokestown **Mod Note in Post #4461**

Lefty Bicek

Omackeral wrote: »

Gardai simply doing their job at the Summerhill eviction may disagree with you there. Their families might too.

Evening, Guard.

Guy:Incognito

noodler wrote: »

Scary the comments on FB.

Everyone supportive of the vigilante action and half of them makigg UI comments.

.

Presumably if they get their United Ireland they'll be no issue with anyone from any part of the north coming down to assist with evictions. After all , people on here have said it should have been a Dublin firm brought in, so if the north becomes part of the country , Antrim is as Irish as Dublin.

kurtainsider

blueythebear wrote: »

Referencing an event that took place over 150 years ago is no defence of this type of carry on. I had thought that the country had gotten over the Famine. Maybe I was wrong.

It's not that at all blueythebear. I'm sure that the people of Strokestown get on just fine with British people as a rule. It's just when van loads of them turn up dressed in black to attack locals and evict them from their homes that the social memories come flooding back.

They were minding their own business until the (ex) UDA showed up to knock them about.

Can you see the distinction at all?

STB.

Omackeral wrote: »

Gardai simply doing their job at the Summerhill eviction may disagree with you there. Their families might too.

The Gardai's job is to uphold public order. Given the whole area of the security usage in the execution of repossession orders is unregulated in Ireland, in this particular case it was clear that the inappropriateness of KBS engaging security firms from outside the state was only going to have one obvious outcome in this area of the country.

AGS need to ask Charlie Flanagan what the hell he is doing in this area as they are caught between a rock and a hard place.

gandalf

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Presumably if they get their United Ireland they'll be no issue with anyone from any part of the north coming down to assist with evictions. After all , people on here have said it should have been a Dublin firm brought in, so if the north becomes part of the country , Antrim is as Irish as Dublin.

Ah then they'd be bitching it was a Dublin firm.

The whole who carried out the eviction is a side issue. The real story here is the rise of mob driven thuggery and how the gardai are going to address it.

blueythebear

riemann wrote: »

I suspect being wrong is something you are familiar with.

It seems that you disagree with me on the Famine bit. That's fine but to my mind, the events of a completely unrelated event (and it was a horrific event) over 150 years ago is not a valid reason for a mob to openly defy the law of the land.

Omackeral

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

Evening, Guard.

Do you disagree with the point made? Do you think it's fair that a member of the gardai should be hounded on social media for following lawful orders? Do you think their families should be intimidated?

Guy:Incognito

[Deleted User] wrote: »

LOL The banks should stop borrowing from us

Lol the banks have already or are in the process of paying back the money in the near future.

P_1

Omackeral wrote: »

Do you disagree with the point made? Do you think it's fair that a member of the gardai should be hounded on social media for following lawful orders? Do you think their families should be intimidated?

The gards shouldn't but the people giving the orders should

Omackeral

STB. wrote: »

The Gardai's job is to uphold public order. Given the whole area of the security usage in the execution of repossession orders is unregulated in Ireland, in this particular case ...

Was speaking about the Summerhill case in the post you quoted, to be fair.

riemann

blueythebear wrote: »

It seems that you disagree with me on the Famine bit. That's fine but to my mind, the events of a completely unrelated event (and it was a horrific event) over 150 years ago is not a valid reason for a mob to openly defy the law of the land.

Time is relative.

Guy:Incognito

kurtainsider wrote: »

Hello Guy:Incognito.
You're obviously a bit behind in you understanding of Irish history. I'm sure that there's plenty of information on Wikipedia about it - would you consider taking a look at it at all?

Is that supposed to be an answer to my post?when they are approaching the banks for loans of their own free will ,do the people inform the banks when they are borrowing from them that they won't be giving up the land they are using as collateral if they end up defaulting, because generations ago their dead relatives were wronged by someone else? Because again, that would be pertinent information.

blueythebear

kurtainsider wrote: »

It's not that at all blueythebear. I'm sure that the people of Strokestown get on just fine with British people as a rule. It's just when van loads of them turn up dressed in black to attack locals and evict them from their homes that the social memories come flooding back.

They were minding their own business until the (ex) UDA showed up to knock them about.

Can you see the distinction at all?

I can see what you're getting at and I'm not blind to the historical significance but you're totally mischaracterising what happened. They did not turn up to attack anyone. They turned up to assist the Sheriff and the Bank to execute a High Court order.

They forcibly removed individuals interfering with that process under the watchful eye of an Garda Siochana. And this was all when they knew they were being filmed.

Lefty Bicek

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

If I have the right property, Google Maps indicates a substantial farm building out the back of the property.

Might be an over-investment ?

And if it was an over investment then the bank wont make a profit on it either.
So they shouldnt have issued the loan. The banks need some responsibility too.

simongurnick

Fair play to the locals. Send those bastards back to Belfast.

kurtainsider

blueythebear wrote: »

It seems that you disagree with me on the Famine bit. That's fine but to my mind, the events of a completely unrelated event (and it was a horrific event) over 150 years ago is not a valid reason for a mob to openly defy the law of the land.

The law of the land condemned many of the ancestors of the people of Strokestown (and almost every other town on the country) to starve to death in past times. Please spare us the "law of the land" defence of the the recent UDA attack on Strokestown Co Roscommon

the_syco

mikeym wrote: »

You mean hired thugs?

These people are not saints by any means.

If they were hired thugs, who was footing the bill for 70 of them?

end of the road wrote: »

it's actually very relevant if PSA licences are not on display or exist as from what i understand it is an offence to not have the required badge on display.

Irish PSA. These are not, however, Irish PSA.

STB. wrote: »

I am all for people paying their mortgages etc but whoever the idiot in KBC is that thought it was a good idea to send in unidentified Northern thugs with that type attitude should be fired. Stroketown has a long history with eviction and more than a little attitude ala Wind that Shakes the Barley.

Consider that's why they sent 8 people.

Next time there'll be 20.

riemann wrote: »

This has nothing to do with the IRA, plenty of men still have a sense of camaraderie and standing by their neighbour.

Actually, I assume it's because plenty of the 70 are farmers who also borrowed big, and are having issues repaying what they borrowed.

andekwarhola wrote: »

To be fair, if it is true that your man is running the firm, it'd be pretty naive to completely rule out that there's no loyalists involved.

Especially if one of them is on the video making a point of saying they're British.

Ah, because all british people are black & tan loyalist scumbags, yes? :pac:

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

Clearly, you think the rights of banks and the state are more important than the protections that we all have a right to expect from the state and it's agents, if we should ever fall into misfortune.

The state told them to leave. They didn't leave. Thus, they lost the protection of the state. You receive the protection of the state when you follow the law.

kurtainsider wrote: »

Strokestown Co Roscommon was a town where the people were particularly badly treated during the famine by outsiders and presumably haven't forgotten it.

If this crap continues in Strokestown, the people of Strokestown may start to get badly treated by all banks for a very long time. No farm loans, no mortgages, no loans of any type.

Lefty Bicek

Omackeral wrote: »

Do you disagree with the point made? Do you think it's fair that a member of the gardai should be hounded on social media for following lawful orders? Do you think their families should be intimidated?

Of course they should not. But your emotive appeals about their families are just rubbish.

If there are regulations about ID, they should be enforced by the Guards on both themselves, and on private contractors. End of.

As it is, all guards wear a shoulder ID. It isn't their Eircode.

Furthermore, the fact of camera and video make objections to ID on the grounds of intimidation, laughable.

Guy:Incognito

kurtainsider wrote: »

It's not that at all blueythebear. I'm sure that the people of Strokestown get on just fine with British people as a rule. It's just when van loads of them turn up dressed in black to attack locals and evict them from their homes that the social memories come flooding back.

They were minding their own business until the (ex) UDA showed up to knock them about.

Can you see the distinction at all?

If the people of strokestown were minding their own business they wouldnt have been anywhere near the farm. And if the owners were minding theirs they'd have handed the land over when the court told them too, or at the very latest when the bank arrived on the day , without any fuss.

STB.

Omackeral wrote: »

Was speaking about the Summerhill case in the post you quoted, to be fair.

Nothing has changed though Omackeral. These security guys are unregulated in ROI and they know it. Members of AGS know that too.

I would imagine there is much disgruntlement among the members that they are meant to be upholding public order, but at the same time are assisting unregulated and probably undocumented bailiffs.

The behaviour of the northern guy self identifying as British in the video was inappropriate. The surprise at the backlash though. Twas predictable.

Omackeral

kurtainsider wrote: »

the recent UDA attack on Strokestown Co Roscommon

It's honestly hard to tell if this is tongue-in-cheek or not.

blueythebear

kurtainsider wrote: »

The law of the land condemned many of the ancestors of the people of Strokestown (and almost every other town on the country) to starve to death in past times. Please spare us the "law of the land" defence of the the recent UDA attack on Strokestown Co Roscommon

The law of the land as it is today is the result of nearly 100 years of democracy in this country. The law of the land during the famine was very different. I don't know how you can compare the two.

davidk1394

From a farming background. Been down this road before. Bit the bullet sold the ground paid the loan and cleared the debit. Remember the day money was handed over and person from the bank was rather nasty. I can understand how this whole thing could have gotten out of hand. I don’t condone the burning out cars, property or beating someone, but I do understand how emotions can run high.

I have a feeling if it was down here the reaction would have been the same, and if the reasons behind the rebellion were genuine and not simply because of thuggery I would be in the middle of them. Using a firm from the north who identified as British was probably the straw that broke the camels back.

Lefty Bicek

the_syco wrote: »

The state told them to leave. They didn't leave. Thus, they lost the protection of the state. You receive the protection of the state when you follow the law.

Too simplistic.

gandalf

kurtainsider wrote: »

The law of the land condemned many of the ancestors of the people of Strokestown (and almost every other town on the country) to starve to death in past times. Please spare us the "law of the land" defence of the the recent UDA attack on Strokestown Co Roscommon

Roflol UDA attack! First it was "the famine made me do it" and now we have the classic "UDA attack".

The guys did not pay their way on a debt, the bank foreclosed, they didn't feck off and the bank forcibly removed them under the watch of the Gardai. What did they expect from the sheriff and his sub contractors a lap dance and a handjob!

riemann

the_syco wrote: »

Actually, I assume it's because plenty of the 70 are farmers who also borrowed big, and are having issues repaying what they borrowed.

Maybe do a little less assuming and a little more reading.

Just a suggestion.

kurtainsider

Omackeral wrote: »

It's honestly hard to tell if this is tongue-in-cheek or not.

No - it's not tongue in cheek at all. Let's call it what it was.

Sean.3516

Sean.3516 wrote: »

I’m Irish and I’ll defend it all day long. Banks or any private lender should have the right to unload non performing loans. Totally fair commercial practice.

Yeah makes total sense to kick people out of their homes during an accommodation crisis. Especially the elderly.

Omackeral

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

Of course they should not. But your emotive appeals about their families are just rubbish.

Yet they do. You shouldn't underestimate scumbags in a "moral" frenzy by the way, easier than ever with social media to launch abuse and intimidation. Nothing is too low for some people. They'd think nothing of intimidating families and feeling they're fighting the good fight.

end of the road

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

That can be an end to the psa licence ****e and nothing was amiss. So people can move on from it and stop using it as their excuse to avoid the issue of the people not paying their loans and having their farm repossessed.

in general, people either being unable, or deliberately not paying their loans and having their assets repossessed doesn't bring much if any discussion. that is why these individuals being unable to pay and having their farm repossessed by the bank isn't generating much discussion, because there isn't really much that can be said on the matter, unless more detail does come out.

the use of security personnel in evictions, especially ones from the north who it seems are unregulated in ireland, personnel who it is alleged have or had links to extreme elements of loyalism, does on the other hand generate lots of discussion, as many are concerned by the practice, especially in a case where it looks as if it could have been forseen that there may have been issues.

Guy:Incognito

kurtainsider wrote: »

. Let's call it what it was.

Fair enough. Utter horse****.

Omackeral

kurtainsider wrote: »

No - it's not tongue in cheek at all. Let's call it what it was.

Ok. Utter hyperbole.

Omackeral

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah makes total sense to kick people out of their homes during an accommodation crisis. Especially the elderly.

Question. What qualifies as elderly?

Guy:Incognito

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yeah makes total sense to kick people out of their homes during an accommodation crisis. Especially the elderly.

**** me. The elderly stuff again. It's been said and no one has disputed it, that the people are in their 50s and early 60s . Elderly my hole.

It makes less sense to allow people to keep homes they aren't paying for.

Cupatae

Fair play to the ones that went down and dished out justice to the lads in black, they were being scum "within the rules" its great to see a whole community rally and support its own. Whatever about paying mortgages the lads in black got what they were asking for, they thought the "rules" would protect them. Feel bad for the dogs tho.

Lefty Bicek

Omackeral wrote: »

Yet they do. You shouldn't underestimate scumbags in a "moral" frenzy by the way, easier than ever with social media to launch abuse and intimidation. Nothing is too low for some people. They'd think nothing of intimidating families and feeling they're fighting the good fight.

I agree.

So really, the state allowing disregard for regulations on some pretext of safety, is redundant.

Is it not ?

It's liable to seem a bit sinister, and it's not like the GS don't have a chronic and long-standing image problem.

kurtainsider

Dear All
I have no more to add to this thread except to reiterate that it wouldn't have taken a genius to figure out that sending the (ex) UDA to Strokestown to throw a family out of their home was never going to end well.

Let's just hope that both the KBC and the (ex) UDA have learned something from the exercise

gandalf

end of the road wrote: »

the use of security personnel in evictions, especially ones from the north who it seems are unregulated in ireland, personnel who it is alleged have or had links to extreme elements of loyalism, does on the other hand generate lots of discussion, as many are concerned by the practice, especially in a case where it looks as if it could have been forseen that there may have been issues.

Actually in all seriousness I didn't realise it was unregulated and there should be oversight on this and regulations binding these sort of services especially as they do cause tension, conflict and in some cases violence.

I also wonder who some of the outraged would accept as purveyors of this sort of service? A bunch of Polish lads? A gaggle of Dubs, some Cork Langer's?

Omackeral

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

I agree.

So really, the state allowing disregard for regulations on some pretext of safety, is redundant.

Is it not ?

It's liable to seem a bit sinister, and it's not like the GS don't have a chronic and long-standing image problem.

Yeah that's fair. Point taken.

simongurnick

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

**** me. The elderly stuff again. It's been said and no one has disputed it, that the people are in their 50s and early 60s . Elderly my hole.

It makes less sense to allow people to keep homes they aren't paying for.

Doesn't matter what age they are. End of the day loyalists heavies intimidated local irish farmers and now they had their asses handed to them. Proper order

Cupatae

I love how all the people on here instantly side with the banks, people have short memories..recession anyone?

gandalf

kurtainsider wrote: »

Dear All
I have no more to add to this thread except to reiterate that it wouldn't have taken a genius to figure out that sending the (ex) UDA to Strokestown to throw a family out of their home was never going to end well.

Let's just hope that both the KBC and the (ex) UDA have learned something from the exercise

Night night Kurt, be careful the UDA are attacking LOL

Mrsmum

blueythebear wrote: »

The law of the land as it is today is the result of nearly 100 years of democracy in this country. The law of the land during the famine was very different. I don't know how you can compare the two.

Quite a lot of people were very annoyed with Preti Patel comments regarding using food shortages in Ireland to push for a better Brexit deal and the reason for the annoyance was the historical context of the famine and Britian's role in starving Ireland. Is it so different for the people of Strokestown, where there was a historic mass eviction called the Strokestown Massacre, to be angry at British people coming in to do this eviction.

Omackeral

Cupatae wrote: »

I love how all the people on here instantly side with the banks, people have short memories..recession anyone?

All the people are siding with the banks? Have you read the thread?!

Cupatae

Omackeral wrote: »

All the people are siding with the banks? Have you read the thread?!

I meant the ones that were not all the people, i worded that wrong.

jimmycrackcorm

simongurnick wrote:

Fair play to the locals. Send those bastards back to Belfast.

The "bastards" were operating legally. The local vigilantes shouldn't be applauded.

STB. wrote:

Nothing has changed though Omackeral. These security guys are unregulated in ROI and they know it. Members of AGS know that too.

Can you point to the regulations? They're not bouncers in a nightclub

simongurnick

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The "bastards" were operating legally. The local vigilantes shouldn't be applauded.



Can you point to the regulations? They're not bouncers in a nightclub

Legal and moral aren't the same thing

Cupatae

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The "bastards" were operating legally. The local vigilantes shouldn't be applauded.



Can you point to the regulations? They're not bouncers in a nightclub

Id argue the law used in this scenario was very very selective...

gandalf

Cupatae wrote: »

Id argue the law used in this scenario was very very selective...

How?

riemann

I wonder how many lads will be signing up for the next eviction down south?

Not many I'd venture.