Strokestown **Mod Note in Post #4461**

Wheeliebin30

Omackeral wrote: »

It's literally been thousands upon thousands of posts at this stage and it's now just become the narrative. It honestly has. It's hardly even challenged such is its ubiquity. If you question it, you're a unionist sympathiser. I've seen it stated that the man in charge of the security firm had previous links to a loyalist group. How that automatically makes every single person working for the company a paramilitary terrorist is beyond me but that's the style of debate these days. It's sad.

What does that say for Sinn Féin?

cameramonkey

Steer55 wrote: »

if the price is right they will always be a buyer

All they will need is a team of security guards to protect it forever.


Could cost a few bob.

Spanish Eyes

OH look here, the defaulters put up two fingers to the banks and the debt collectors for many years. I am not one bit impressed.

SOWHAT.IE

High Court Rules apply to evictions the "operatives" don't need to be licensed - Obviously they should be?

markodaly

Omackeral wrote: »

It's literally been thousands upon thousands of posts at this stage and it's now just become the narrative. It honestly has. It's hardly even challenged such is its ubiquity. If you question it, you're a unionist sympathiser. I've seen it stated that the man in charge of the security firm had previous links to a loyalist group. How that automatically makes every single person working for the company a paramilitary terrorist is beyond me but that's the style of debate these days. It's sad.

Repeat a lie long enough it becomes the accepted truth.

cameramonkey

cameramonkey wrote: »

It cost to evict, the asset will be impossible to sell, so worthless.

We can be fairly sure KBC has already worked this out long before evicting yer man, its not a step taken lightly.

If he hasn't paid in years, is not co-operating and the revenue are chasing him then they probably sold the loan for way less than it was originally worth.

If the fund gets *anything* in a sale they will be happy and it sends a message to anyone else thinking of not paying the bank.

nullzero

markodaly wrote: »

He was clearly a member of the UDA or a loyalist because he had an accent......

I guess all those guys with brown skin and funny beards are all members of ISIS.
Look at the crap you are posting.

A person who identifies themselves as British with a northern Irish accent can safely be described as loyalist (which does not affiliate them solely with sectarianism).

You are taking a massive leap in logic in accusing me of being bigoted and assuming I think all brown skinned people are members of ISIS.
You need to calm down.

cameramonkey

cameramonkey wrote: »

All they will need is a team of security guards to protect it forever.


Could cost a few bob.

What does this mean?

Danzy

markodaly wrote: »

First of all, it was not KBC who handled this issue. The loan was sold on and it was the Sheriff who organised the security.

Secondly, what other avenue was there? The loans go back to 2004, thats 14/15 years ago. Apparently, nothing has been paid off those loans.
Should he be given another 15 years before he starts to pay anything back?
It's clear that we are dealing with a chancer and the banks were at the end of the road in regards dealing with him.

People are disagreeing with that, what escalated it was the way it handled.

The Govt. response, understandable from them, yet it does not help. When did FG become converted to fiscal probity and the rule of law, what changed there?

Things like this happen every day across Ireland, about 80 times a week,they do not make the news, even locally.

Escalate it though and you'll get a reaction.

Danzy

bubblypop wrote: »

What does this mean?

It is very obvious what it means.

Danzy

Danzy wrote: »

People are disagreeing with that, what escalated it was the way it handled.

The Govt. response, understandable from them, yet it does not help. When did FG become converted to fiscal probity and the rule of law, what changed there?

Things like this happen every day across Ireland, about 80 times a week,they do not make the news, even locally.

Escalate it though and you'll get a reaction.

Evictions do happen all over Ireland, & they don't make the news, when the person leaves the property!!
Walk away.
If they refuse to go that's when things escalate. Their own fault.

Omackeral

nullzero wrote: »

Did you bother to read the post you quoted?
I said he was clearly a loyalist and I then said assuming that makes him a member of the UDA is supposition. I don't think he necessarily is a UDA member, maybe he is, maybe he doesn't like jaffa cakes, I can't say.

People up North have the right to identify as Irish or British. Doesn't mean they have to identify as Nationalist or Unionist, Catholic or Protestant. You're assuming, probably correctly, but still, it's an assumption. That's just one point.

At least you'll go with maybe or maybe not on the UDA thing. Others here just regurgitate it as gospel. It's dishonest posting without any real proof.

nullzero

pablo128 wrote: »

What I mean by resident is that a PSA holder has to reside in the republic of Ireland, while those holding the northern equivalent of the PSA have to reside in the north. Neither can work in the other jurisdiction as a security guard.

I'm not disagreeing with you that people carrying out evictions should be licenced, by the way. It should have been sorted long ago. However, for now that's how it is.

That's all fair enough, I learned something I wasn't aware of and we understand each other now.

Spanish Eyes

If anyone in Strokestown is impressed by these people I give up.

I doubt it really though. There is a limit.

Danzy

Danzy wrote: »

It is very obvious what it means.

No?
Can you explain?

markodaly

nullzero wrote: »

A person who identifies themselves as British with a northern Irish accent can safely be described as loyalist (which does not affiliate them solely with sectarianism).

Only if you are a bigot and racist.

I guess that makes Rory Best, captain of the Ireland rugby team a 'Loyalist' too...

BalcombeSt4

Loyalists up to no good as usual. Bet Billy Hutchinson & the UVF were behind this one, want to check for bombs around the city.

nullzero

Omackeral wrote: »

People up North have the right to identify as Irish or British. Doesn't mean they have to identify as Nationalist or Unionist, Catholic or Protestant. You're assuming, probably correctly, but still, it's an assumption. That's just one point.

At least you'll go with maybe or maybe not on the UDA thing. Others here just regurgitate it as gospel. It's dishonest posting without any real proof.

At least I'll go with maybe or maybe not?
There's no proof either way, referring to somebody as loyalist isn't bigoted and nor is it fair to accuse me of seeing all brown skinned people as members of ISIS(I know you didn't say those things).

The thing about the man in question is that He identified himself as being British, which would make him a loyalist or unionist which is something I didn't realise was a term of abuse, rather a term used to describe these peoples own political affiliations.

cameramonkey

bubblypop wrote: »

What does this mean?

Is it so difficult to understand?

nullzero

markodaly wrote: »

Only if you are a bigot and racist.

I guess that makes Rory Best, captain of the Ireland rugby team a 'Loyalist' too...

Are you calling me a bigot and a racist because I said somebody was a loyalist? I stated that there was no evidence that the man in question is or was a member of the UDA. He identified Himself and British, which would by definition make him a loyalist, or if you like a Unionist.
And this from a poster who started this thread... https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057917456/1/#post108274569
So are you offended on the part of Northern Irish people who identify as British being called loyalist? Its hardly the hate crime of the century.

Danzy

bubblypop wrote: »

No?
Can you explain?

The place is now for sale.

Can cattle water troughs be guarded all day and night, that sheds, machinery, bales be guarded, that is what a new owner will need to consider.

There was always going to be a danger when they turned this in to a circus.

What will happen and whether it is right or wrong is immaterial when it will still happen.

It took an immense effort to make this the situation it has become but they managed it.

People who would never have time for people like this landowner are now in his corner on a point of principal where if it was handled differently, it would never have been a story.

fryup

time for a quick comedy interlude:

cameramonkey

cameramonkey wrote: »

Is it so difficult to understand?

Yep.
Think you will have to explain it in simple language.

Edit, saw your next post.
Basically you think that anyone who buys this repossessed property will be subject to ongoing criminality by some locals? Or is it former owners?
Or who exactly will commit all this crime?

Omackeral

nullzero wrote: »

At least I'll go with maybe or maybe not?
There's no proof either way

Exactly. I'm commending you on being level about it. It's a fair outlook.

nullzero wrote: »

referring to somebody as loyalist isn't bigoted

I wouldn't say it's bigoted but maybe it's an assumption (I do reckon it's quite a possible one here personally, tbh) to just mark all folks into a political box. People in Northern Ireland are able to identify as Irish or British. Some of them probably couldn't give a fiddlers about politics but still need to have a nationality at the end of the day.

Lefty Bicek

cameramonkey wrote: »

Is it so difficult to understand?

Don't feed the sealions.

Their pathetic charade of wide-eyed inquiry is so laughable.

You're supposed to pretend that they've not read the thread, and even if they had, that they couldn't put two and two together.

Danzy

fryup wrote: »

time for a quick comedy interlude:

These people are terrorizing their own community the rest of the year.

fryup

Danzy wrote: »

These people are terrorizing their own community the rest of the year.

and who are "these people"?

P_1

Varadkar is playing this like a shambles. All he's going to do is radicalise people into following that loolah Gilroy and his band of idiot hi vis vest wearers

nullzero

Omackeral wrote: »

Exactly. I'm commending you on being level about it. It's a fair outlook.



I wouldn't say it's bigoted but maybe it's an assumption (I do reckon it's quite a possible one here personally, tbh) to just mark all folks into a political box. People in Northern Ireland are able to identify as Irish or British. Some of them probably couldn't give a fiddlers about politics but still need to have a nationality at the end of the day.

I'm glad you highlighted that it isn't bigoted.
To be honest I read the post I originally quoted without taking note of the poster (as I've had previous with this guy I wouldn't have given myself the headache of talking to him again) and now I'm being called a bigot and having assumptions made about my attitude towards people with "brown skin". Three reported posts and nothing done.

markodaly

nullzero wrote: »

Are you calling me a bigot and a racist because I said somebody was a loyalist? I

I am calling you a bigot and racist because you used an accent and identity to determine someone is 'clearly' a loyalist i.e. a member of a paramilitary outfit.

Unless you actually know who the person is, then making such judgments based on the criteria above makes you a bigot and racist.

markodaly

To clarify, if one was to make the same judgments using the same criteria about a brown skinned man, who said he was from the Middle East and someone said they were 'clearly' a member of a terrorist outfit, that also would be racist.

end of the road

bubblypop wrote: »

Why would it be impossible to sell?

already mentioned in the thread.

nullzero

markodaly wrote: »

I am calling you a bigot and racist because you used an accent and identity to determine someone is 'clearly' a loyalist i.e. a member of a paramilitary outfit.

Unless you actually know who the person is, then making such judgments based on the criteria above makes you a bigot and racist.

He identified HIMSELF as British. His accent is that of a person from Northern Ireland. That would make him part of the protestant/loyalist/unionist community. He described HIMSELF this way, I said to say he was a member of the UDA was supposition.

You then run with the notion that I'm a bigot and a racist. How dare you. You are clearly incapable of rational discussion. Shame on you.

nullzero

markodaly wrote: »

To clarify, if one was to make the same judgments using the same criteria about a brown skinned man, who said he was from the Middle East and someone said they were 'clearly' a member of a terrorist outfit, that also would be racist.

I never said he was clearly a member of a terrorist outfit, I said the opposite, you quoted it ffs.

cameramonkey

bubblypop wrote: »

Yep.
Think you will have to explain it in simple language.

Edit, saw your next post.
Basically you think that anyone who buys this repossessed property will be subject to ongoing criminality by some locals? Or is it former owners?
Or who exactly will commit all this crime?

No, I didn't say anything of the sort. You are mistaken.

tuxy

markodaly wrote: »

I am calling you a bigot and racist because you used an accent and identity to determine someone is 'clearly' a loyalist i.e. a member of a paramilitary outfit.

Loyalist can mean

Ulster loyalist, a political ideology found primarily among Ulster Protestants in Northern Ireland(legal)

Or can mean Loyalist paramilitary(illegal)

You can't just accuse someone of meaning one and not the other unless they have made it clear.

Lefty Bicek

nullzero wrote: »

He identified HIMSELF as British. His accent is that of a person from Northern Ireland. That would make him part of the protestant/loyalist/unionist community. He described HIMSELF this way, I said to say he was a member of the UDA was supposition.

You then run with the notion that I'm a bigot and a racist. How dare you. You are clearly incapable of rational discussion. Shame on you.

In other words, in a highly charged environment, his default siege mentality over-rules his common sense.

Gotta love that intransigence.

Alliance Party, he ain't.

end of the road

bubblypop wrote: »

Plenty of people would buy it.
I know lots of people who have bought repossessed properties.
Don't see any issues?

this is very different. things are very different in rural areas where land is concerned.

Danzy

Danzy wrote: »

The place is now for sale.

Can cattle water troughs be guarded all day and night, that sheds, machinery, bales be guarded, that is what a new owner will need to consider.

There was always going to be a danger when they turned this in to a circus.

What will happen and whether it is right or wrong is immaterial when it will still happen.

It took an immense effort to make this the situation it has become but they managed it.

People who would never have time for people like this landowner are now in his corner on a point of principal where if it was handled differently, it would never have been a story.

So what does this mean then?

simongurnick

relax carry on wrote: »

Ok to to hone in on the actual case itself and leaving aside the eviction action carried out by the security firm which seems to have become mired in emotional opinions; do you accept that the process followed from 2009 to August 2018 allowed the borrower ever chance to deal with his financial responsibilities?
I believe that if he had engaged in a meaningful manner including possibly selling some of his assets to meet his debts he may not have found himself in the situation he did. Instead he seems to have compounded his problems given what we know of his issues with Revenue.

You may be right. Sounds like he had every chance, but we don't have the full story so it's speculation on all sides

Danzy

bubblypop wrote: »

Yep.
Think you will have to explain it in simple language.

Edit, saw your next post.
Basically you think that anyone who buys this repossessed property will be subject to ongoing criminality by some locals? Or is it former owners?
Or who exactly will commit all this crime?

Who knows, in a way nor does it matter.

There is always a danger in making a difficult situation a complete disaster.



I think it will be wrong that it happens but that changes nothing.

I doubt if it was handled differently that this problem would arise. It would just be another one of 80 repossessions a week, which never have a fuss or news about.
So yes, I think if you got it for free, got the cattle for free, ration and fertilizer for free ,you couldn't make money off of it now.

That would not have been the case prior to this debacle.

Right or wrong, it is what it is.

cameramonkey

P_1 wrote: »

Varadkar is playing this like a shambles. All he's going to do is radicalise people into following that loolah Gilroy and his band of idiot hi vis vest wearers

No matter how bad Varadkar is and he is bad, no one will ever follow Gilroy in large numbers.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

this is very different. things are very different in rural areas where land is concerned.

I'm from a rural area.
I have seen evictions in my area, & seen people buy the property afterwards.
I haven't seen any issues.

cameramonkey

markodaly wrote: »

I am calling you a bigot and racist because you used an accent and identity to determine someone is 'clearly' a loyalist i.e. a member of a paramilitary outfit.

Unless you actually know who the person is, then making such judgments based on the criteria above makes you a bigot and racist.

Loyalist does not mean a member of a paramilitary gang. You need to read up a bit about the history of the north.

fryup

bubblypop wrote: »

I'm from a rural area.
I have seen evictions in my area, & seen people buy the property afterwards.
I haven't seen any issues.

yes but in this case there will be, you wanna be very brave or foolhardy to buy that property

cameramonkey

bubblypop wrote: »

I'm from a rural area.
I have seen evictions in my area, & seen people buy the property afterwards.
I haven't seen any issues.

So you would be pretty sure this farm could get sold easily and the new owners would have a happy time there.

Danzy

Danzy wrote: »

if it was handled differently that this problem would arise. It would just be another one of 80 repossessions a week, which never have a fuss or news about.

Agreed.
If they just left the property, like most other normal people involved in repossessions, then there wouldn't have been any issues

end of the road

the_syco wrote: »

The show of force will help others decide to leave when the Courts tell them to do so.

i'd doubt it tbh.

markodaly

nullzero wrote: »

He identified HIMSELF as British.

Yes

His accent is that of a person from Northern Ireland.

Possibly.

That would make him part of the protestant/loyalist/unionist community.

Nope.

You do not know his religion, you do not know what 'community' he belongs to, you do not know his politics.
You are making a judgment purely based on identity and accent. That is bigoted.

The fact is you do not know this person, so you cannot make a call on what he is or isnt.

Lefty Bicek

markodaly wrote: »

The fact is you do not know this person, so you cannot make a call on what he is or isnt.

Doesn't stop you doing it on here.