Gemma not taking enforced retirement too well

TheRepentent

cookie1977 wrote: »

Sounds like whataboutism

Yep a wall of whataboutism.....

humberklog

Here's a recent Twitter post by Gemzer and it has me confused. Is she kinda saying she not a conspiracy theorist but look at what CT's are banging on about now or is it that she's saying other CT's like her are on the case?




@gemmaod1



·
1h


Conspiracy theorists at it again claiming #JeffreyEpstein had a nose and ear job while in prison. This can all be cleared up once his body and death certificate (signed by eminent medic) are released

MontgomeryClift

cookie1977 wrote: »

Message, speech. Whats the difference? Vial contemptuous messages of hate of others should not be permitted a sounding board. Particularly if that same person is profiting from them.

The problem here is that what's vile or contemptuous is a matter of opinion. There are those who find homosexuality to be vile, for instance.

At present the group with the power (a coalition of capitalist corporations, politicians, media and LGTB activists) has decided that certain views that they don't like will lead to deplatforming.

Another group could, and probably will, take power in future, and decide that expressions in favour of homosexuality, globalism, capitalism and immigration are to be met with deplatforming or worse.

What we're really talking about here is power.

AndrewJRenko wrote:

No-one is being blocked on YouTube because of their political beliefs. They are being blocked for inciting hatred, which is against the law.

If that's the case then it's highly irresponsible of you not to report your evidence of this illegal activity to the Gardaí.

One minute the ban is for breach of the terms of service of the platform, the next it's for breaking the law, and it has nothing to do with the rules of the platform. Make up your minds which excuse you're going to stick with.

cookie1977

MontgomeryClift wrote: »

The problem here is that what's vile or contemptuous is a matter of opinion. There are those who find homosexuality to be vile, for instance.

At present the group with the power (a coalition of capitalist corporations, politicians, media and LGTB activists) has decided that certain views that they don't like will lead to deplatforming.

Another group could, and probably will, take power in future, and decide that expressions in favour of homosexuality, globalism, capitalism and immigration are to be met with deplatforming or worse.

What we're really talking about here is power.


If that's the case then it's highly irresponsible of you not to report your evidence of this illegal activity to the Gardaí.

It's delusional to think that what Gemma says is anything but vile and contemptuous. Dont hide behind free speech. What we're talking about here is someone promoting and trying to profit from hate.

Annasopra

MontgomeryClift wrote: »

What we're really talking about here is power.

Nah. What we are talking about here is fascist hate. Gemma and her supporters continuously spead fascist hate (of muslims, immigrants, black children, lgbt people and basically anyone who disagrees with her) and ordinary Irish people are coming together finally to stand against it.

Stephen15

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Nah. What we are talking about here is fascist hate. Gemma and her supporters continuously spead fascist hate (of muslims, immigrants, black children, lgbt people and basically anyone who disagrees with her) and ordinary Irish people are coming together finally to stand against it.

I didn't see much diversity in the counter protest

cookie1977

Stephen15 wrote: »

I didn't see much diversity in the counter protest

Yes well unfortunately the committee for the even distribution of protestor diversity were notified late about the meet up. They will endeavor to try harder next time. But we're delighted you noticed "some" diversity on one side.

Annasopra

Stephen15 wrote: »

I didn't see much diversity in the counter protest

Not sure what your point is.

Speakers Unicorner is a broad movement of people organising against the fascist racist hatred of Gemma/Rowan Croft/Justin Barrett et al

TheRepentent

Stephen15 wrote: »

I didn't see much diversity in the counter protest

What I did see were loads of Irish telling other Irsh people to f off with their hate, bullsh1t excuses and lies.

Jog on , we know your number :rolleyes:

batgoat

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Not sure what your point is.

Speakers Unicorner is a broad movement of people organising against the fascist racist hatred of Gemma/Rowan Croft/Justin Barrett et al

Yes but there was no man dressed as a viking or going 'seig heil'....

Nulu5

MarquisDeSad wrote: »

Can people say whatever they want without a reply? Can hate speech mongers like Gemma o Doherty expect not to be challenged?

I remember a previous poster with exact same paradoxical view on free speech. He believed hate speech should be allowed without counter. Which of course is nonsense.

I take no issue with someone,s political views being challenged or counter argued. I do strongly disagree with the idea of people.s views being silenced either online or offline by any proposed laws under the guise of " hate speech ".

I looked at some of Gemma,s recent social media postings one topic she has posted critically about is halal slaughter.

How many would consider openly expressing critically views on halal slaughter as " hate speech"?

Nulu5

Nulu5 wrote: »

I take no issue with someone,s political views being challenged or counter argued. I do strongly disagree with the idea of people.s views being silenced either online or offline by any proposed laws under the guise of " hate speech ".

I looked at some of Gemma,s recent social media postings one topic she has posted critically about is halal slaughter.

How many would consider openly expressing critically views on halal slaughter as " hate speech"?

You mean the one which she tagged the islamification of #Ireland continues. Yeah same type of tactic is tried in vegan and vegetarian chat forms by "concerned" new members.

They are quickly identified and banned from them too for breaking the terms and conditions of the sites.

cookie1977

Nulu5 wrote: »

I take no issue with someone,s political views being challenged or counter argued. I do strongly disagree with the idea of people.s views being silenced either online or offline by any proposed laws under the guise of " hate speech ".

I looked at some of Gemma,s recent social media postings one topic she has posted critically about is halal slaughter.

How many would consider openly expressing critically views on halal slaughter as " hate speech"?

even a broken clock is right twice a day.

AngryHippie

cookie1977 wrote: »

even a broken clock is right twice a day.

aaaand the rest of the time it is a misleading waste of space that will catch you out when you are in a hurry and should best be outright ignored.:cool:

Unless of course you intend looking at it twice a day, at coincidence o'clock and sing it's praises..:rolleyes:

ILoveYourVibes

Originally Posted by Nulu5 View Post
I take no issue with someone,s political views being challenged or counter argued. I do strongly disagree with the idea of people.s views being silenced either online or offline by any proposed laws under the guise of " hate speech ".

I looked at some of Gemma,s recent social media postings one topic she has posted critically about is halal slaughter.

How many would consider openly expressing critically views on halal slaughter as " hate speech"?

halal slaughter isn't cruel.

There is a misconception they don't use stunning. They do, they just time it differently and use other stunning methods.

In Islam they are commanded not to be cruel to animals.

Its the TYPE of stunning that matters.

ILoveYourVibes

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

halal slaughter isn't cruel.

There is a misconception they don't use stunning. They do, they just time it differently and use other stunning methods.

In Islam they are commanded not to be cruel to animals.

Its the TYPE of stunning that matters.

Well halal can be very cruel if the animal has not been stunned, and it isn't always (about 10% last I read) . Its certainly cruel under schechita where pre-stunning is totally forbidden. An animal that has not been pre-stunned takes longer to lose consciousness. A cow for example can take up to two minutes. Admittedly the % of animals killed this way is relatively small, but its still a huge number of individuals given how many are slaughtered.

Has the hoodwinker upgraded her microphone yet? Always sounded like she was on a flight with a terrible intercom system.

Annasopra

Good radio interview with Hazel Chu on Ryan Tubridy this morning.

She's right. We can no longer ignore the growth of fascist hatred in Ireland.

MarquisDeSad

Nulu5 wrote: »

MarquisDeSad wrote: »

Can people say whatever they want without a reply? Can hate speech mongers like Gemma o Doherty expect not to be challenged?

I remember a previous poster with exact same paradoxical view on free speech. He believed hate speech should be allowed without counter. Which of course is nonsense.

I take no issue with someone,s political views being challenged or counter argued. I do strongly disagree with the idea of people.s views being silenced either online or offline by any proposed laws under the guise of " hate speech ".

I looked at some of Gemma,s recent social media postings one topic she has posted critically about is halal slaughter.

How many would consider openly expressing critically views on halal slaughter as " hate speech"?

You brought up Casey earlier and his speech has not been silenced and neither has O'Doherty's.

Bringing up one tweet O'Doherty is just lazy at best. You choose to ignore a fairly substantial quantity of hate driven tweets.

To make it clear to you. Using words like 'silenced' is transparent for anyone reading. You don't like people countering hate speech. It's all there in your posting history Kira.

FTA69

I think the likes of O’Doherty and Croft etc are 100% manifestations of a global upsurge in far right or quasi-fascist politics; however they’re also politically insignificant, mired in conspiracy and would be viewed as off the wall by nearly everyone. Contrast the muppets outside Google with the numbers and sorts of people the far right in England have pulled off (Tommy Robinson and the DFLA etc) and you’ll have an idea of the scale of the problem.

I think a far more worrying development in real terms will be the emergence of a new populist right that will gain traction amongst swathes of middle Ireland who are annoyed with long commutes, crap services, high taxes etc; there could well be mass scapegoating of Travellers, migrants, unemployed etc and you could see the rise of someone like Peter Casey on steroids.

If I was concerned about the right and far-right I don’t think the biggest problem is Black and Tan Torino or some shrill idiot banging on about 5G.

MarquisDeSad

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Originally Posted by Nulu5 View Post
I take no issue with someone,s political views being challenged or counter argued. I do strongly disagree with the idea of people.s views being silenced either online or offline by any proposed laws under the guise of " hate speech ".

I looked at some of Gemma,s recent social media postings one topic she has posted critically about is halal slaughter.

How many would consider openly expressing critically views on halal slaughter as " hate speech"?

halal slaughter isn't cruel.

There is a misconception they don't use stunning. They do, they just time it differently and use other stunning methods.

In Islam they are commanded not to be cruel to animals.

Its the TYPE of stunning that matters.

The same people who get red in the face about halal, happily chow down on battery caged chickens.

Timberrrrrrrr

MarquisDeSad wrote: »

The same people who get red in the face about halal, happily chow down on battery caged chickens.

Or never seem to have an issue with kosher food even though kosher food is not stunned pre slaughter.

The Nal

MarquisDeSad wrote: »

The same people who get red in the face about halal, happily chow down on battery caged chickens.

And love a bit of fois gras.

What I find sad is that Gems uses this halal anti Muslim thing as a cheap way to pick up followers - and it works! People on this thread up in arms about halal now!

Pathetic weaklings.

ohnonotgmail

FTA69 wrote: »

I think the likes of O’Doherty and Croft etc are 100% manifestations of a global upsurge in far right or quasi-fascist politics; however they’re also politically insignificant, mired in conspiracy and would be viewed as off the wall by nearly everyone. Contrast the muppets outside Google with the numbers and sorts of people the far right in England have pulled off (Tommy Robinson and the DFLA etc) and you’ll have an idea of the scale of the problem.

I think a far more worrying development in real terms will be the emergence of a new populist right that will gain traction amongst swathes of middle Ireland who are annoyed with long commutes, crap services, high taxes etc; there could well be mass scapegoating of Travellers, migrants, unemployed etc and you could see the rise of someone like Peter Casey on steroids.

If I was concerned about the right and far-right I don’t think the biggest problem is Black and Tan Torino or some shrill idiot banging on about 5G.

Which is why it is important to counter them now before they get a foothold. They were very slow in england to counter the likes of tommy robinson.

Seanachai

TheRepentent wrote: »

Antifa doing their job :rolleyes:

Always find it amusing the ones that give out about antifa ,

are the ones most likely to get a few slaps of them.

I don't attend protests, I think they're pointless, but if one of them swung at me and I knock his teeth out or crack his jaw for him, it's more than likely me who's going to get arrested. Why are they shown such leniency, why did their supposedly former strategist in Ireland get off so lightly when images of minors were found on his computer?

Blueshoe

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Good radio interview with Hazel Chu on Ryan Tubridy this morning.

She's right. We can no longer ignore the growth of fascist hatred in Ireland.

Hazel Chu is a facist and an idiot . Ryan tubridy is a bubble dwelling tax dodging coward.
Neither are worth paying any attention to.

MarquisDeSad

Hazel Chu is fascist? . Fascinating insight, though completely wrong.

tigger123

Blueshoe wrote: »

Hazel Chu is a facist and an idiot . Ryan tubridy is a bubble dwelling tax dodging coward.
Neither are worth paying any attention to.

What's that based on?!

banie01

tigger123 wrote: »

What's that based on?!

Slanty eyes?
It's definitely the slanty eyes!

Lackadaisical

To be quite honest if you want to look at cruelty in farming, I would start with live exports both to countries with extremely poor records around animal welfare and to veal production. Some of that aspect of farming is absolutely blind to what goes on once the cattle have left the farm. We really scrape the bottom of the barrel when by doing that.

Also battery farming of chickens for meat or eggs simply shouldn’t be happening and there are similar issues around pig farming.

Halal slaughter (when stunned) doesn’t seem to be a hell of a lot different from any other form of slaughter. It was an ancient attempt to standardise slaughter and remove cruelty. It’s just been ritualised into a religions beliefs and modern “humane slaughter” practices go beyond what was trying to be achieved by it. I don’t really see the massive controversy though. The key concern is that an animal shouldn’t be experiencing pain or stress. They shouldn’t be aware of what’s going on at all.

If you’re outraged by killing cows and other animals, don’t eat them. It’s as simple as that. Otherwise, know exactly where it’s coming from and take some responsibility for traceability.

I’d be far more concerned about cheap chicken and pork of unknown origin eg in processed food and fast food than I would about anything else.