When did Gemma O Doherty go batshyt crazy?

francois

bells of shandon wrote: »

Google is your friend ,do your own research

Another new pro-Gemma account

Bannasidhe

bells of shandon wrote: »

Judging the poll on Gemma O'Doherty , it is heartening to see that about 20% of boards .ie forum are awake and have not succumbed to the Establishment Media attack on her.
I hope she is elected as an MEP in Dublin and can replace the troughers we have at present in Brussels.

Hello Again New Poster.

Been waiting since my coffee break this morning for you to provide some form of supporting evidence. It's now lunchtime. Can we expect it by dinner time?

Also - about that 20% of boards.ie forum you claim 'are awake' - as of 13:50 on the 25/4/19 a total of 491 have voted in this poll. A figure far short of the actual number of posters on Boards.ie - or even just in this particular forum (AH) so your claim is incorrect.

A do hope your evidence when you present it is of a higher standard.

Charles Ingles

Why do people attack her personally instead of the points she makes.
The obviously knows her stuff and isn't feeding the same line on things as the Irish media.
I think she is a strong Independent smart woman.
A lot of her criticism is basd in sexism

Timberrrrrrrr

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Why do people attack her personally instead of the points she makes.
The obviously knows her stuff and isn't feeding the same line on things as the Irish media.
I think she is a strong Independent smart woman.
A lot of her criticism is basd in sexism

Her sex has nothing to do with it, it's her hypocrisy that galls me.

Charles Ingles

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Her sex has nothing to do with it, it's her hypocrisy that galls me.

Haven't heard her described as a hypocrite, where has she been hypocritical?

circadian

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Why do people attack her personally instead of the points she makes.
The obviously knows her stuff and isn't feeding the same line on things as the Irish media.
I think she is a strong Independent smart woman.
A lot of her criticism is basd in sexism

Her criticism is based on the fact that she regularly espouses conspiracy theories.

super_furry

Oh man, I hope she eventually gets to Eugene Tooms

Charles Ingles

circadian wrote: »

Her criticism is based on the fact that she regularly espouses conspiracy theories.

Or offers up alternative opinions on world events.
I'd rather that Rte the all political parties ramming the narrative down our throats.
And the way she is ridiculed makes me think she closer to the truth.

circadian

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Or offers up alternative opinions on world events.
I'd rather that Rte the all political parties ramming the narrative down our throats.
And the way she is ridiculed makes me think she closer to the truth.

You couldn't be further from the truth.

TaurenDruid

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Haven't heard her described as a hypocrite, where has she been hypocritical?

Just one example? Claiming during the presidential election that she wasn't anti-vaxx. As soon as that's over she's attacking pro-vaccination people and autism activists and defending bleach as a "cure" for autism (which, in her mind, is caused by vaccines).

Another? Her anti-immigrant stance. Despite having being married to one.

ohnonotgmail

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Haven't heard her described as a hypocrite, where has she been hypocritical?

well there was the fact that she asked Panti for support when she tried to run for Panti and then turned on everything gay when Panti wouldn't give her support.

Martina1991

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well there was the fact that she asked Panti for support when she tried to run for Panti and then turned on everything gay when Panti wouldn't give her support.

And one of her "awards" was sponsored by Glaxo Smithkline, a the "Big Pharma" company that she is apparently against.

Grayson

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Why do people attack her personally instead of the points she makes.
The obviously knows her stuff and isn't feeding the same line on things as the Irish media.
I think she is a strong Independent smart woman.
A lot of her criticism is basd in sexism

I don't think you realise that she is the points she makes. That's her personality. She's into kids drinking bleach for autism and chemtrails. I'm not going to even bother trying to debunk that crap. It's like arguing with a flat earther.

And hey, we've been just as hard on gran torino and his crazy crap.

Martina1991

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Just one example? Claiming during the presidential election that she wasn't anti-vaxx. As soon as that's over she's attacking pro-vaccination people and autism activists and defending bleach as a "cure" for autism (which, in her mind, is caused by vaccines).

Another? Her anti-immigrant stance. Despite having being married to one.

Also a tweet stating "Corrupt FF rely on migrants to stand for them" when a lady of clearly non Irish descent was one of her few supporters at a recent ACI meeting.

I wonder did she tell that lady to leave the country :rolleyes:

TaurenDruid

So apart from the anti-vaxx thing, the immigrants, the gays, the big pharma awards, and the immigrants again... we'd have to think about it. Would you like us to, or is that enough to be going on with?

super_furry

bells of shandon wrote: »

Judging the poll on Gemma O'Doherty , it is heartening to see that about 20% of boards .ie forum are awake and have not succumbed to the Establishment Media attack on her.
I hope she is elected as an MEP in Dublin and can replace the troughers we have at present in Brussels.

Hi Gemma! When are you going to get to spontaneous combustion and the link between in and microwaves?

super_furry

Charles Ingles wrote: »

And the way she is ridiculed makes me think she closer to the truth.

Really, that says more about you than anything else

Charles Ingles

super_furry wrote: »

Really, that says more about you than anything else

Well you would say that wouldn't you.
Obvious to everyone why

gandalf

I voted yes but part of me was tempted to vote no because I do believe that she is positioning herself with these crazy ideas for personal gain. She is aiming at becoming a mini Alex Jones type alt right personality hoping that the alt right funders in the states throw her some cash.

I'm all for people giving alternative views of world events once they have foundations based on relevant facts. The issue is that Gemma has pitched her flag in with some very murky people indeed who are putting lives at risk because of their anti-vax views or stoking up hatred because of their racist stances. Then you have the Chem trails brigade :rolleyes:

She is living off limited past journalistic achievements and even those are tainted by family members of the subjects of those investigations condemning GoD and her hijacking of the respective campaigns for her own PR purposes.

She is a busted flush and far from pristine anti-corruption heroine that some of the deluded make her out to be. Imho if the establishment wanted to have a eminently discreditable candidate to pitch against them she would be ideal.

Timberrrrrrrr

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Haven't heard her described as a hypocrite, where has she been hypocritical?

She screams on about the right to free speech, say anything negative or even politelty question her on FB or Twitter and she instantly blocks you.

Bannasidhe

gandalf wrote: »

I voted yes but part of me was tempted to vote no because I do believe that she is positioning herself with these crazy ideas for personal gain. She is aiming at becoming a mini Alex Jones type alt right personality hoping that the alt right funders in the states throw her some cash.

I'm all for people giving alternative views of world events once they have foundations based on relevant facts. The issue is that Gemma has pitched her flag in with some very murky people indeed who are putting lives at risk because of their anti-vax views or stoking up hatred because of their racist stances. Then you have the Chem trails brigade :rolleyes:

She is living off limited past journalistic achievements and even those are tainted by family members of the subjects of those investigations condemning GoD and her hijacking of the respective campaigns for her own PR purposes.

She is a busted flush and far from pristine anti-corruption heroine that some of the deluded make her out to be. Imho if the establishment wanted to have a eminently discreditable candidate to pitch against them she would be ideal.

We could seriously do with someone credible exposing corruption, shady deals, and general incompetence in the public sector.
But to be able to speak truth to power you need to be truthful.
To call Authority to account you need to be accountable.

Gemma O'Doherty is a loose cannon without a shred of credibility who employs the language of hate to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

Charles Ingles

I like her,
Don't agree with get stance on the homosexualities.
Her arguments about immigration aren't that crazy.
What's wrong with controlled emigration with an eye to keeping Christian values in Ireland I think you find most people want to keep it that way

gandalf

Charles Ingles wrote: »

I like her,
Don't agree with get stance on the homosexualities.
Her arguments about immigration aren't that crazy.
What's wrong with controlled emigration with an eye to keeping Christian values in Ireland I think you find most people want to keep it that way

Ohh ffs we're trying to expunge religion from our state not strengthen it. We need to ensure Ireland is a secular state in the future. This keep Christian values lark is bollix.

Also if you find her stance on LGBT wrong then you can't cherry pick her other ideas can you, unless your are being deceitful?

TheRepentent

This thread has gotten a really bad dose of the Gemaroids today......

CosmicFool

TheRepentent wrote: »

This thread has gotten a really bad dose of the Gemaroids today......

Gemmaroids. Love it

AndrewJRenko

Charles Ingles wrote: »

with an eye to keeping Christian values in Ireland I think you find most people want to keep it that way

The last two referenda results would suggest that most people have moved on from traditional Christian values.

Charles Ingles

gandalf wrote: »

Ohh ffs we're trying to expunge religion from our state not strengthen it. We need to ensure Ireland is a secular state in the future. This keep Christian values lark is bollix.

Also if you find her stance on LGBT wrong then you can't cherry pick her other ideas can you, unless your are being deceitful?

Of course I disagree with some of her opinions and agree with others.
As for keeping Ireland as a Christian country most people would agree with me.
Seems calls for secularism only applies to Catholics, nobody would dare be critical of Islam but Catholics are fair game.im a strong advocate of LGBTQI rights.
But can still hope for a strong Ireland grounded in Christian values

The Nal

Charles Ingles wrote: »

O
But can still hope for a strong Ireland grounded in Christian values

Thats barbaric and clearly going the opposite direction with no chance of redemption.

God is dead.

Get on board.

TaurenDruid

Charles Ingles wrote: »

I like her,
Don't agree with get stance on the homosexualities.
Her arguments about immigration aren't that crazy.
What's wrong with controlled emigration with an eye to keeping Christian values in Ireland I think you find most people want to keep it that way

I presume that first sentence is down to auto-predict.

Her arguments about immigration are pretty crazy, because nobody has or is proposing uncontrolled mass immigration - yet that's exactly what she rails against. To the extent we end up with proposed direct provision centres being set on fire, costing employment in rural towns...

We already have controlled immigration. It's great - anyone from the EU can come and work here. I can go to any other EU country and work. Really opens horizons and opportunities for my family.

I honestly don't think most people want to keep "Christian values" for the country, whatever the **** they are. 66% voted yes for marriage equality, 66% voted yes to repeal the 8th, and probably 70-something % will vote yes to remove restrictions on divorce in May, and the biggest increase in demographic in the last census was those putting 'no religion' down.

Christian values of 796 dead babies in a septic tank, forced adoptions, forced birth, vaccine trials (ironic, innit?!) on children without parental consent, covering up child abuse (although that was the communists, according to Gemma) - yeah, we're not really all that gone on them any more...

gandalf

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Of course I disagree with some of her opinions and agree with others.
As for keeping Ireland as a Christian country most people would agree with me.
Seems calls for secularism only applies to Catholics, nobody would dare be critical of Islam but Catholics are fair game.im a strong advocate of LGBTQI rights.
But can still hope for a strong Ireland grounded in Christian values

Recent polls on same sex marriage and repeal of the eight amendment would suggest to me that the churches day of influencing the majority in Ireland has thankfully gone.

If you are a strong advocate of LGBTQI rights then you should not be supporting GoD. I mean she has a problem with TK Maxx selling Unicorn based products because it's promoting Transsexualism FFS.

Your stance is like a German saying in the 1930's "I don't agree with Adolfs stance on Jews but I support him because the Autobahns are a good idea ":rolleyes:

TaurenDruid

Charles Ingles wrote: »

As for keeping Ireland as a Christian country most people would agree with me.
Seems calls for secularism only applies to Catholics, nobody would dare be critical of Islam but Catholics are fair game.

Who or what you worship in the privacy of your own house, church, mosque, or temple is between you and your non-existent god(s)/goddess(es). I don't want it in any way involved with me or mine when it comes to education, healthcare, state services, or laws, thank you very much.

That applies whether you're Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Mormon, Scientoligist, Wiccan...

blackwhite

Charles Ingles wrote: »

I like her,
Don't agree with get stance on the homosexualities.
Her arguments about immigration aren't that crazy.
What's wrong with controlled emigration with an eye to keeping Christian values in Ireland I think you find most people want to keep it that way

What about her stance on "swamp creatures" appearing at the sites of terror attacks?

I think batshyt crazy is being generous to her at this stage

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1120985486439350273

The Nal

gandalf wrote: »

You're stance is like a German saying in the 1930's "I don't agree with Adolfs stance on Jews but I support him because the Autobahns are a good idea ":rolleyes:

"I don't agree with Adolfs stance on Jews but I support him because he loved his dog".

Bannasidhe

gandalf wrote: »

If you are a strong advocate of LGBTQI rights then you should not be supporting GoD. I mean she has a problem with TK Maxx selling Unicorn based products because it's promoting Transsexualism FFS.

The biggest obstacles to securing LGBTQI rights in Ireland has been these so-called "Christian" values - and I say that as someone who came out in the early 80s and have spent my adult life arguing against these so-called "Christian" values that justified policies of exclusion and hate.

Pherekydes

bells of shandon wrote: »

She is right on...
blah, blah

What about chemtrails, vaccinations, racism, xenophobia and chemtrails?

circadian

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The biggest obstacles to securing LGBTQI rights in Ireland has been these so-called "Christian" values - and I say that as someone who came out in the early 80s and have spent my adult life arguing against these so-called "Christian" values that justified policies of exclusion and hate.

The funny thing about these Christian Values is that they aren't actually very Christian at all.

ohnonotgmail

circadian wrote: »

The funny thing about these Christian Values is that they aren't actually very Christian at all.

and oddly enough their christian values seem to be almost exclusively from the old testament.

RayCun

gandalf wrote: »

You're stance is like a German saying in the 1930's "I don't agree with Adolfs stance on Jews but I support him because the Autobahns are a good idea ":rolleyes:

Except he's saying that he does agree with her stance on Islam.

So it's more like, "Oh Adolf gets carried away with all that Third Reich stuff, but he has a point about those Jews"

gandalf

RayCun wrote: »

Except he's saying that he does agree with her stance on Islam.

So it's more like, "Oh Adolf gets carried away with all that Third Reich stuff, but he has a point about those Jews"

And in reality if they are a supporter of "Christian values" Ireland then their proclamation on support for the LGBT community are at odds with this as well. I think they may be a little confused, a bit like GoD herself

bells of shandon

circadian wrote: »

The funny thing about these Christian Values is that they aren't actually very Christian at all.

We need Islam to replace Christianity in Ireland ASAP. We can then have Polygamy, Female Genital Mutilitation. stoning to death of adulterous wives, Sharia Law, and freedom for rape gangs.

RayCun

bells of shandon wrote: »

We need Islam to replace Christianity in Ireland ASAP. We can then have Polygamy, Female Genital Mutilitation. stoning to death of adulterous wives, Sharia Law, and freedom for rape gangs.

The Gemma O'Doherty fan club, ladies and gentlemen.

Grayson

RayCun wrote: »

The Gemma O'Doherty fan club, ladies and gentlemen.

Why do somethings have capitals and some don't?

mcmoustache

RayCun wrote: »

The Gemma O'Doherty fan club, ladies and gentlemen.

I honestly can't tell if they're serious.

Charles Ingles

Amazing all the people who want to shut down debate or different opinions.
Then they label people Nazis just because they don't agree with them.
A lot of what Gemma says 100% correct.
The more they attack her the closer she must be to the truth

Bannasidhe

bells of shandon wrote: »

We need Islam to replace Christianity in Ireland ASAP. We can then have Polygamy, Female Genital Mutilitation. stoning to death of adulterous wives, Sharia Law, and freedom for rape gangs.

Hi There.

Any chance of that evidence?
You have had hours - surely your friend Google can help you.

Given the way women in Ireland were treated by Christianity I can't help but think perhaps women, in general, would be better off if we just kept all religions away from our laws.

But thank you for your concern.

CosmicFool

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Amazing all the people who want to shut down debate or different opinions.
Then they label people Nazis just because they don't agree with them.
A lot of what Gemma says 100% correct.
The more they attack her the closer she must be to the truth

Oh the old she's being attacked tactic. It's not that she's being attacked but more being called out on her BS

tony 2 tone

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Amazing all the people who want to shut down debate or different opinions.
Then they label people Nazis just because they don't agree with them.
A lot of what Gemma says 100% correct.
The more they attack her the closer she must be to the truth

What has she been correct about?

Ipso

bells of shandon wrote: »

We need Islam to replace Christianity in Ireland ASAP. We can then have Polygamy, Female Genital Mutilitation. stoning to death of adulterous wives, Sharia Law, and freedom for rape gangs.

The stuff from rhe good book?

Grayson

Charles Ingles wrote: »

A lot of what Gemma says 100% correct

Charles Ingles

CosmicFool wrote: »

Oh the old she's being attacked tactic. It's not that she's being attacked but more being called out on her BS

Come on she mocked and undermined constantly on thread.
Her point are far more nuanced that her detractors make out.
I genuinely worry about her safety he could be gone after,the establishment doesn't like whistle blowers.