Sinn Fein's Paddy Holohan and homophobia

Plumbthedepths

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Whatever about the homophobic connotations, it's the equivalent of saying that male gynaecologists Skype not have a job when they don't have a cat.

Did that make sense to you?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The 'far right' need a dog whistle?
Is there a person in the country that doesn't know of his Indian heritage?

I am not waht abouting. I am asking someone who has decided this is outright racism how he explains the below.

He mentioned his 'Indian blood'
/Case closed

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

He mentioned his 'Indian blood'
/Case closed

So what?

Pearse had English blood
Connolly had Scottish
Dev was American


Are we not allowed to mention these things?

Charles Babbage

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

Thread title could well read Noel Rock uses his leaders sexual preference as fuel for his own campaign. As pointed out people in the gay community can and do raise children.

However, they often raise children by deliberately separating them from their other parent. If anything, Varadkar is being more respecting of children by not doing this.



The Indian blood thing neither here nor there if you were brought up in Ireland.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So what?

He mentions his 'Indian blood' in the context that
a) his linage is not part of the country
b) his passions does not go back to our passions

In other-words because he has Indian blood, he is 'less' Irish than most of us.....

Defend it all you want. Whatabout it all you want, but it is what it is.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

He mentions his 'Indian blood' in the context that
a) his linage is not part of the country
b) his passions does not go back to our passions

In other-words because he has Indian blood, he is 'less' Irish than most of us.....

Defend it all you want. Whatabout it all you want, but it is what it is.

No no no. He never said boo about being 'less Irish'. That is conjecture.

You have a different connection with our history than I do.
It is perfectly legitimate and non racist for you or I to say , that either is 'separate from our history'.

There is no implication there about less or more Irish'

Again, the clarification was made...'Leo is obviously a part of that (our history)

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Are we not allowed to mention these things?

I think certain unionists refer to the Taoiseach as 'The Indian' not as a term of endearment
Discussing any politicians Race,creed (or lack of) orientation etc in the context of their ability to do their job is not on
To me aswell its actually a very UN Republican thing to do
I just hope the apology was sincere and the miscalculation realised
Couching it in 'I was misunderstood etc' doesn't suggest it was,unfortunately

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No no no. He never said boo about being 'less Irish'. That is conjecture.

Its a dog whistle used time and time about by nationalists and racists. Anytime they talk about blood, that is what they mean.
Why else mention his 'Indian blood' therefore in this instance? For the craic of it?

Hangdogroad

Is he the Mcgregor clone who was on with Tommy Tiernan last week?

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Its a dog whistle used time and time about by nationalists and racists. Anytime they talk about blood, that is what they mean.
Why else mention his 'Indian blood' therefore in this instance? For the craic of it?

Why mention him at all?



How can you on the one hand say somebody is a part of our history and then be accused of trying to claim he is not Irish.

Granted the man made a stupid and bungling point but accusing him of racism is way over the top.
Had he been racist, I don't think Leo would be leaving it at that, it would be wrong to do that. He would have been right to demand his resignation had he thought he was being intentionally racist or homophobic.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why mention him at all?

You didnt answer my quesiton.
Why did this SF councilor bring up Leo's 'Indian blood' when making political commentery?

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

You didnt answer my quesiton.
Why did this SF councilor bring up Leo's 'Indian blood' when making political commentery?

Well I didn't know there was a rule about mentioning somebody's heritage part or whole. Is there a rulebook on this?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well I didn't know there was a rule about mentioning somebody's heritage part or whole. Is there a rulebook on this?

Dancing on the pinhead again Francie.

Again, for the 4th time you refuse to answer a simple question.

'Whatabout..'
'Whatabout..'
'Whatabout..'

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Dancing on the pinhead again Francie.

Again, for the 4th time you refuse to answer a simple question.

'Whatabout..'
'Whatabout..'
'Whatabout..'

I asked you a question. Where are these rules you speak about?

Who says you cannot mention his Indian heritage. Does that apply to all politicians?

You aren't making a pile of sense.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I asked you a question. Where are these rules you speak about?

Who says you cannot mention his Indian heritage. Does that apply to all politicians?

You aren't making a pile of sense.

More whatabout nonesense.

I will repeat this post, as you seem intent on boring us with this little merry-go-around of yours with your silly little diversionery tactics.

He mentions his 'Indian blood' in the context that
a) his linage is not part of the country
b) his passions does not go back to our passions

Dog whistles for nationalists and the far right, which you want to try and 'whatabout' away.

Oh and you didnt answer the question.

Eric Cartman

Im the first person to love giving the shinners a good kicking when possible but the idea that this statement is homophobic or that 99.9% of anything any politician has said about Leo is routed in homophobia is insanity. Its the ultimate way of washing away legitimate criticism of a deeply flawed party and its leader is to run the 'homophobia' card on it.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

More whatabout nonesense.

I will repeat this post, as you seem intent on boring us with this little merry-go-around of yours with your silly little diversionery tactics.



Dog whistles for nationalists and the far right, which you want to try and 'whatabout' away.

Oh and you didnt answer the question.

Where did he say the following:

a) his linage is not part of the country
b) his passions does not go back to our passions

Far as I can see this is what he said. (Conjecture removed)

His great-grandfather is not part of the history of this ­country. Now Leo obviously is.

"He’s an Irish ­citizen but his ­passion doesn’t go back to the times when our passion goes back to.

Are you sure it isn't you telling lies that is the 'dog-whistling' here mark?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Are you sure it isn't you telling lies that is the 'dog-whistling' here mark?

Why dont you answer the question Francie.
Why did he mention his 'Indian blood'?

I suppose the dear good and honourable Lord Kilclooney had nothing to answer for either.

https://www.thejournal.ie/leo-varadkar-lord-kilclooney-typical-indian-3988745-May2018/

Former Ulster Unionist Party deputy leader Lord Kilclooney tweeted in response to a BBC news story in which Varadkar was accused of “poor manners” over his visit to Northern Ireland yesterday, calling the Taoiseach a “typical Indian”.

By your own admission, there is nothing wrong calling Leo an Indian right?
Sinn Fein'd Paddy Holohan and UUP Lord Kilclooney were just stating 'facts'?

Am I right? :rolleyes:

padd b1975

Bambi wrote: »

If you ever saw an interview with the guy you'd know he was one of those poor dopes who thinks he full of deep insights.

Like that chancer with a plastic bag on his head.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Why dont you answer the question Francie.
Why did he mention his 'Indian blood'?

I suppose the dear good and honourable Lord Kilclooney had nothing to answer for either.

https://www.thejournal.ie/leo-varadkar-lord-kilclooney-typical-indian-3988745-May2018/


By your own admission, there is nothing wrong calling Leo an Indian right?
Sinn Fein'd Paddy Holohan and UUP Lord Kilclooney were just stating 'facts'?

Am I right? :rolleyes:

Why he mentioned his Indian blood is there in the transcript of what he said.

He was making a stupid and rambling point as to why he thought Leo was separate to his history.
But by stating that Leo was obviously a part of that history, he was sure as hell wasn't saying he wasn't Irish.

Do you accept that you got it wrong on these points mark?

His great-grandfather is not part of the history of this ­country. Now Leo obviously is.

"He’s an Irish ­citizen but his ­passion doesn’t go back to the times when our passion goes back to.

Annasopra

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It was a stupid rambling point open to misinterpretation. It was misinterpreted, his party immediately disassociated itself and publicly demanded that he apologise. He clarified, he apologised for any offence caused and apology was accepted.

Not sure where it goes from here tbh.

It was a mealy mouthed half arsed non apology apology really though

Annasopra

joe40 wrote: »

Every party has individuals that say or do stupid things, that are odds with the party position.
Whatever your views on Sinn Fein as a party they are pushing a progressive agenda. The guy in Leitrim coming out in favour of the direct provision facility, campaigning for marriage equality in the north etc.
This guys statements are at odds with the party line, but he has apologized, what more can he do.

If anyone else made those comments Mary Lou McDonald would be screaming for resignation.

Annasopra

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where did he say the following:

a) his linage is not part of the country
b) his passions does not go back to our passions

Far as I can see this is what he said. (Conjecture removed)

His great-grandfather is not part of the history of this ­country. Now Leo obviously is.

"He’s an Irish ­citizen but his ­passion doesn’t go back to the times when our passion goes back to.

Are you sure it isn't you telling lies that is the 'dog-whistling' here mark?

Apparently Leos Maternal grandparents are completely irrelevant and dont exist.

Bishop of hope

Every party and loads of independent lads and lassies like Holohan up and down the country.
Picked to be party members, councillors and even TD's because of their ability to get votes moreso than their ability to do anything really political or be politically correct.
It will continue to be the case forever in political circles.
A mountain out of a molehill here.

FrancieBrady

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

It was a mealy mouthed half arsed non apology apology really though

It was, but it was accepted, but then it was a mealy mouthed half arse point as well.

But when you seeing posters deliberately lying about what he actually said, he didn't say either of these things:

markodaly wrote:

a) his linage is not part of the country
b) his passions does not go back to our passions

and omitting parts of what he said

'Leo is obviously a part of it (our history)

because it doesn't suit the narrative that he was trying to say Leo was 'not Irish' then it isn't hard to know what is going on here.

FrancieBrady

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Apparently Leos Maternal grandparents are completely irrelevant and dont exist.

Yes. I said it was 'a stupid, rambling point' for a reason.

Nuttzz

I had to laugh when he thought that a family man should be running the country, which kinda rules out his own party president!

Dyr

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

If anyone else made those comments Mary Lou McDonald would be screaming for resignation.

That's the gas thing about it, hoisted on her own petard of wokeness


The comments are more retarded than racist but thats what happens when you stick a sports celeb into politics. Kenny Egan, Eamonn Coughlan and so forth

All dzzopes

KiKi III

Some people will refuse to believe any statement short of “I hate gays” is homophobic.

Eric Cartman

KiKi III wrote: »

Some people will refuse to believe any statement short of “I hate gays” is homophobic.

Abd some people refuse to believe any criticism of a gay public fugure isnt homophobic, but sure here we are now