When did Gemma O Doherty go batshyt crazy?

musiknonstop

Ivan2019 wrote: »

Fair enough
But if the right wing seize control they will hold you to your own standards related to free speech

The Cork Putsch was a bit of a washout.

ohnonotgmail

Ivan2019 wrote: »

Fair enough
But if the right wing seize control they will hold you to your own standards related to free speech

Patty Hearst wrote: »

They can never imagine that happening even though the right wing are seizing control all over Europe.

and if we say nothing now they will be all nice?

AndrewJRenko

Ivan2019 wrote: »

Fair enough
But if the right wing seize control they will hold you to your own standards related to free speech

Any thoughts on how you they are going to get the coup organised when no-one is going to let you in to their hall?

Edgware

Where are all the people who thought she was the greatest thing since the Watergate journalists now?

AndrewJRenko

Ivan2019 wrote: »

Bad and all as the right wing are i can.t see them blocking free speech
Only brainless bolsheviks do that

So why does Gemma block so many people who ask her some hard questions on Twitter?

batgoat

Ivan2019 wrote: »

Bad and all as the right wing are i can.t see them blocking free speech
Only brainless bolsheviks do that

Gemma threatened 96fm with legal action when Fiona O'Leary challenged her on the air. This resulted in them taking down the clip....

Bannasidhe

gmisk wrote: »

Only on Monday like I said!
On a Tuesday it's gay agenda studies and gay recruitment.

I can't make Tuesdays as I have my Feminazi Coven knitting circle then (we're making neutered pussy hats). Can we reschedule Gay Agenda studies to a Wednesday? - that's if it doesn't clash with Woden was a Woosie Workshops.

Subcomandante Marcos

Auntie Semite wrote: »

Pat Corcoran, founder and current big shot of AntiFa Ireland
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/former-civil-servant-caught-with-7000-child-porn-images-avoids-jail-29755182.html

Can you show where his name is listed on the board of management of AntiFa?

Or their structure at all?

I'll not hold my breath waiting.

Gombeen.

Bannasidhe

TaurenDruid wrote: »

/begins to insert standard response about the right to free speech not being an entitlement to spout hate speech, then stops when they notice the poster has a sum total of 7 posts to their name...

7 posts he was free to post.

Just saying like...

:P

batgoat

Ivan2019 wrote: »

We'll just have to agree to disagree so
I love Gemma's videos

But she actively silenced somebody for disagreeing with her... She even sent a mob off to harass the woman. So some silencing through intimidation etc is good?

AndrewJRenko

Ivan2019 wrote: »

She can't be wasting her time on trolls
She.s got a world to save

So it's OK for her to block the free speech of people who's opinion she disagrees with?

Ivan2019 wrote: »

We'll just have to agree to disagree so
I love Gemma's videos

You don't get to disagree with facts. Facts are facts.



You're quite entitled to love Gemma's videos. You're not entitled to pretend that she doesn't 'block free speech' to use your own terminology.

Patty Hearst

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Can you show where his name is listed on the board of management of AntiFa?

Or their structure at all?

I'll not hold my breath waiting.

Gombeen.

Whatever about the guy being the leader of anti fa the other part of that post is true

This interview with AFA ireland appeared on a blog hamburgersnheroin and was scrubbed shortly after due to complaints

its archived online

"One of the things we’re interested in at the moment is the continued existence of reactionary norms such as the so called nuclear family. By drawing on the work of Wilhem Reich, who examined the idea of fascism as a symptom of sexual repression, we are taking the ‘Reicheann approach’ by advocating for the early managed sexualisation of children so as to prevent the formation of any earlier fascist traits"

"advocating for the early managed sexualisation of children"

he says it in the interview as representative of Afa ireland

batgoat

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Whatever about the guy being the leader of anti fa the other part of that post is true

This interview with AFA ireland appeared on a blog hamburgersnheroin and was scrubbed shortly after due to complaints

its archived online

"One of the things we’re interested in at the moment is the continued existence of reactionary norms such as the so called nuclear family. By drawing on the work of Wilhem Reich, who examined the idea of fascism as a symptom of sexual repression, we are taking the ‘Reicheann approach’ by advocating for the early managed sexualisation of children so as to prevent the formation of any earlier fascist traits"

"advocating for the early managed sexualisation of children"

he says it in the interview as representative of Afa ireland

Can you provide a link to where you retrieved that quote from? I'm only getting white supremacy sites when I search it..

Annasopra

Ivan2019 wrote: »

Gemma is very easy to listen to
Scarlet for the twitter mob trying to do a takedown on her

You clearly havent listened to her

Annasopra

Ivan2019 wrote: »

Fair play to the liberals for shutting down free speech without a hint of irony

Are you calling Gemma a liberal?

Annasopra

hill16bhoy wrote: »

What a delicious irony.

O'Doherty says she's an "award-winning journalist".

And who gave her an award, but, wait for it, GlaxoSmithKline. :D:D

You really couldn't make it up.



https://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/gene-kerrigan/gene-kerrigan-this-is-too-serious-for-conspiracy-theories-37945108.html

Big pharma

Annasopra

Ivan2019 wrote: »

Bad and all as the right wing are i can.t see them blocking free speech
Only brainless bolsheviks do that

Gemma is the one censoring. She blocks people from Social media all the time. She se5s her lawyers on people all the time. She even hired private security to physically remove people who questioned her in Ashbourne. She harassed Fiona O'Leary so much on youtube that it broke their terms and conditions.

Gemma is not a free speech advocate at all.

Annasopra

Ivan2019 wrote: »

FYI I watch her videos in bed going to sleep
Then and again she appears in lucid dreams

Shes so easy to listen to she puts you to sleep.

rgossip30

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Who funded the no side? Who funds iona?

You tell me .

rgossip30

batgoat wrote: »

Just confirmed, there's absolutely no credible evidence of this. In addition, that quote of yours in relation to sexualising children originates from the DailyStormer and politicalirish, both of which are not so subtly fascist if one is to give them a quick browse, the former being rather obviously so.

Seems like you've gone rather silent since I've highlighted how nonsensical your claims are. And it's a bit weird how I'm led to so many fascist sites.... What sort of websites are you browsing?

. https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/former-civil-servant-caught-with-7000-child-porn-images-avoids-jail-29755182.html The report in the Independent does show he is a convicted paedofile . The link shows images of him at protests https://www.google.com/search?q=patrick+corcoran+afa+antifa&client=tablet-android-digiin&prmd=niv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwji5NWN9p7hAhXWEHIKHerzAloQ_AUoAnoECAwQAg&biw=1367&bih=801&dpr=0.75#isa=y. https://www.indymedia.ie/article/104264. The resignation of Pat Corcoran from Indymedia as a result of his conviction. http://archive.is/BcDmW. Pat Corcoran's expulsion from Antifa as a result of the conviction. The interview shows them to hard line with violent intentions .

batgoat wrote: »

He contributed towards the campaign for a referendum. No law was broken and it's one of many philanthropic contributions he's made. All our listed on his website, so hardly nefarious.


https://www.thejournal.ie/sipo-amnesty-decision-4156736-Jul2018/

Also here's her latest Soros conspiracy... The evil 5g agenda so yep, she's very much so pushing the antisemitic conspiracy crap.

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1110112738490175494?s=19

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Who funded the no side? Who funds iona?

rgossip30 wrote: »

.[?/QUOTE]. I voted in favour of abortion but I still find it unethical that outside sources try to influence a referendum regardless of what side they financally support .You appear to favour this. What has 5g got to do with antisemitic crap .

DS86DS

If Gemma was a Leftist spouting Left Wing ideas, this thread would have been closed after 5 minutes and the OP banned.

jeremyj1968

Well whatever you think about O'Doherty, she should have been allowed to have a meeting without it being shut down. I mean if the hotel refused to have a traveller meeting it would be all over Joe Duffy, but because it is someone who is considered conservative it is fine. She is not right on everything but if she wants to hold a meeting then she should be allowed to do so.

But unfortunately it seems that most of the people in Ireland are happy to get their news from Joe Duffy and Denis O'Brien instead of actually thinking for themselves, so good look to them.

SnakePlissken

She's not a conservative, she's a homophobic troll and any business which accommodates her should be rightly criticised.

AndrewJRenko

jeremyj1968 wrote: »

Well whatever you think about O'Doherty, she should have been allowed to have a meeting without it being shut down. I mean if the hotel refused to have a traveller meeting it would be all over Joe Duffy, but because it is someone who is considered conservative it is fine. She is not right on everything but if she wants to hold a meeting then she should be allowed to do so.

So do we need to add "being a transphobe, homophobe, racist" to the Equality Act as a new protected ground? She's not being stopped from having her meeting or 'free speech'. She's just finding it hard to find businesses that want to accommodate her platforms of hate.

Maybe she should consider being a little less hateful?

padd b1975

batgoat wrote: »

Gemma threatened 96fm with legal action when Fiona O'Leary challenged her on the air. This resulted in them taking down the clip....

They would have taken it down on the back of their own legal advice I'd imagine, which tells me that whatever guff O'Leary was spouting wasn't all that solid.

Achasanai

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Gemma is not a free speech advocate at all.

I don't think somebody who believes that only 'brainless bolsheviks' censor is ever going to get that.

batgoat

padd b1975 wrote: »

They would have taken it down on the back of their own legal advice I'd imagine, which tells me that whatever guff O'Leary was spouting wasn't all that solid.

If I recall correctly it was around Gemma's views on vaccines and such. So entirely solid. Gemma has a tendency to legally threaten everyone who disagrees with her so not an isolated incident.

Timberrrrrrrr

Auntie Semite wrote: »

It should be noted that many posting on this thread, are members of AntiFa Ireland.

Whos leader is a convicted Paedophile

And who explicitly and publicly advocate for 'the Early Sexualisation of Children

You can imagine why they hate Gemma so much what with her desire to preserve the innocence of Children.

Really

Who, name and shame! Where did you find this information out? Is there a list we can see?

Annasopra

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Really

Who, name and shame! Where did you find this information out? Is there a list we can see?

Nah. Its just a deflection tactic.

We talk about Gemma. Her supporters all rush in to defelect about any old irrelevant sh 1te. Its kinda hilarious in a way. Gemmas supporters are trying a few tactics here on a continuous loop
1 Rereg, rereg and rereg again
2 Just throw in a little bit about how she is reasonable in certain areas
3 Lash in the old "free speech" with no sense of irony on Gemma shutting down speech
4 This one is quite hilarious. They are now disowning Gemma and dont want to talk about Gemma.

Jackman25

DS86DS wrote: »

If Gemma was a Leftist spouting Left Wing ideas, this thread would have been closed after 5 minutes and the OP banned.

Its interesting to note the difference between this thread and the Louise O'Neill thread. On the LON thread, the lefties were plaintively whining about people keeping the thread going and why not just ignore her.
The same ilk are happily piling into this thread.

For the record I think both are batshyt.

francois

TaurenDruid wrote: »

/begins to insert standard response about the right to free speech not being an entitlement to spout hate speech, then stops when they notice the poster has a sum total of 7 posts to their name...

Seems to be a pattern emerging of new accounts, posting the same Andrew Anglin play-book comments in a couple of threads (Yaxley-Lennon, NZ shooting etc) repeated an tedium

batgoat

Jackman25 wrote: »

Its interesting to note the difference between this thread and the Louise O'Neill thread. On the LON thread, the lefties were plaintively whining about people keeping the thread going and why not just ignore her.
The same ilk are happily piling into this thread.

For the record I think both are batshyt.

Pretty sure Louise O'Neill isn't running hate speech rallies...

musiknonstop

batgoat wrote: »

If I recall correctly it was around Gemma's views on vaccines and such. So entirely solid. Gemma has a tendency to legally threaten everyone who disagrees with her so not an isolated incident.

Fiona O'L claimed Gemma was anti-vax. Gemma claimed that was an outrageous slur and her lawyers would be looking into it. Gemma claimed to be anti-nothing apart from corruption. We know she's anti-vax so it seems she was not telling the truth back then.

https://youtu.be/diX07k6wGPI?t=1

Mr. CooL ICE

DS86DS wrote: »

If Gemma was a Leftist spouting Left Wing ideas, this thread would have been closed after 5 minutes and the OP banned.

This is not true.

However, if the OP started the thread, dumped a 1+ hour long political video, in a forum that is not for politics, without contributing any sort of discussion themselves, despite previously being told by mods not to, then yeah, the thread "might have been closed after 5 minutes and the OP banned".

ohnonotgmail

rgossip30 wrote: »

You tell me .

well somebody else to has to as Iona certainly wont.

ohnonotgmail

jeremyj1968 wrote: »

Well whatever you think about O'Doherty, she should have been allowed to have a meeting without it being shut down. I mean if the hotel refused to have a traveller meeting it would be all over Joe Duffy, but because it is someone who is considered conservative it is fine. She is not right on everything but if she wants to hold a meeting then she should be allowed to do so.

But unfortunately it seems that most of the people in Ireland are happy to get their news from Joe Duffy and Denis O'Brien instead of actually thinking for themselves, so good look to them.

batshyt crazy conspiracy theorist is not a protected class of people.

Jackman25

batgoat wrote: »

Pretty sure Louise O'Neill isn't running hate speech rallies...

I have no idea what Gemma is at and I don't care. What hate speech rally is she running?

DS86DS

Mark Rippetoe wrote: »

This is not true.

However, if the OP started the thread, dumped a 1+ hour long political video, in a forum that is not for politics, without contributing any sort of discussion themselves, despite previously being told by mods not to, then yeah, the thread "might have been closed after 5 minutes and the OP banned".

Yeah, sure.

ohnonotgmail

Jackman25 wrote: »

I have no idea what Gemma is at and I don't care. What hate speech rally is she running?

perhaps educate yourself about her before criticising those that are opposed to her.

Jackman25

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

perhaps educate yourself about her before criticising those that are opposed to her.

Why bother. She is about as relevant as Jim Corr and deserves about as much attention.

ohnonotgmail

Jackman25 wrote: »

Why bother. She is about as relevant as Jim Corr and deserves about as much attention.

so why bother posting in a thread about her?

Jackman25

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so why bother posting in a thread about her?

Just found it interesting the difference in attitude when its a thread on a lefty feminist.

ohnonotgmail

Jackman25 wrote: »

Just found it interesting the difference in attitude when its a thread on a lefty feminist.

As i said earlier you need to educate yourself about gemma before commenting.

The Nal

Jackman25 wrote: »

Just found it interesting the difference in attitude when its a thread on a lefty feminist.

Shes not a feminist.

Jackman25

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

As i said earlier you need to educate yourself about gemma before commenting.

Why would I need to myself about someone that is supposedly from the title of the thread "batshyt crazy". The exact detail of Gemmas "content" is not relevant to my point.

Anyway, don't let me keep you from the good work of saving us all from Gemma and her handful of disciples.
Continue on with the thread.

Jackman25

The Nal wrote: »

Shes not a feminist.

I was talking about LON.

Bannasidhe

Jackman25 wrote: »

Just found it interesting the difference in attitude when its a thread on a lefty feminist.

Interesting that despite your proclaimed lack of interest in G O'D you could make the effort to draw a false equivalency between someone being a "lefty feminist" and someone who has been seen to repeatedly engage in hate speech, shut down criticism, engage in wild conspiracy theories, show scant regard to the families of murder victims etc etc.

Smells like yet more deflection.

batgoat

Jackman25 wrote: »

I have no idea what Gemma is at and I don't care. What hate speech rally is she running?

She's regularly being racist, antisemitic and homophobic... That's the type of people she caters to.

ollkiller

batgoat wrote: »

She's regularly being racist, antisemitic and homophobic... That's the type of people she caters to.

The same type of people who instead of doing anything to better their own existence blame others for their life being ****. Always the easy choice of blaming immigrants, big pharma etc etc. How about you take the hard choice for once and put some work into your own life.

Grayson

DS86DS wrote: »

If Gemma was a Leftist spouting Left Wing ideas, this thread would have been closed after 5 minutes and the OP banned.

Because that's what happened to the Louise O'Neill thread?