Leo Varadkar story in The Village??? - Mod Notes and banned Users in OP updated 16/05

blanch152

RandomName2 wrote: »

as far as it goes #leotheleak is accurate. It just doesn't constitute discussion.

I am perfectly happy if not wanting to discuss this was based upon a lack of new information, but their insistence is instead to post fake questions (including having their own positions carefully explained to them) or veer off into either stating the obvious and red herrings. Worse still is their faux moral outrage that discussing the topic constitutes a distraction. So I think it is worthwhile calling out the demonstrable lack of good faith in their position.

It's only a leak if it's illegal. Sharing isn't leaking.

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

It's only a leak if it's illegal. Sharing isn't leaking.

Please stop mentioning leaking. My elderly bladder isn’t what it used be.

Suckit

blanch152 wrote: »

You are talking to the mob. Coherent, logical arguments are not the strongpoint of mobs.

Simplified inaccurate slogans are the modus operandi.

Too true.. everybody else are just homophobic, racist, misogynistic sexist pigs..



Oh...and to blame for anything that FG mess up. :rolleyes:

James Brown

RandomName2 wrote: »

...

The argument is that Varadkar was so petrified of NAGP's hostility that he.. didn't accede to any of the union's demands but instead gave the draft GP agreement that had been concluded without NAGP to O'Thuanthail.

Yes.

RandomName2 wrote: »

...

It is fine if you say that your side of the debate does not have any more to offer, pending new information becoming available, but this lame idea that your side want a discussion, when all they do is the same three things outlined above, is really a bit much.

You keep making assumptions based on the opinions of multiple posters and then assign that view to all of them.
Its at worst dishonest, at best, highly inaccurate.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

It's only a leak if it's illegal. Sharing isn't leaking.

You'll not hold down any job with that self governing.
FYI: Leo leaked a confidential document.

Topgear on Dave

Regularly lying awake at night thinking of Leo at 3am cannot be healthy.

happyoutscan

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Regularly lying awake at night thinking of Leo at 3am cannot be healthy.

Were you up all night thinking that? :rolleyes:

shtpEdthePlum

At 3am is sad, at 4:16am is grand!

maccored

RandomName2 wrote: »

It's a little bit early for electioneering. I know you'd always have on eye on the polls but I was talking about the subject matter in good faith.

The echo rebuttal is just used as a lazy mechanism to stop talking about the subject matter, but actually drown it out with twitter hashtag level of political engagement. We both know why you're doing it.

Not that it's relevant but last election I voted PBP/Independent/FF in that order and in the euros before that I voted Independent/I4C

But no, in all honesty this case, as presently presented, wouldn't change my opinion of Fine Gael at all. It feels like it has been artificially inflated for the sake of political expediency, a position I feel is corroborated by its proponents being reluctant to actually discuss the salient points, but reverting to the usual feigned confusion (asking things that are clearly obvious, and that they have asked before), doing the echo rebuttal, and pretending that any coherent debate is distracting.

'We' do? You may let me in on it as I havent a ****ing clue what you;re going on about tbh

RandomName2

maccored wrote: »

'We' do? You may let me in on it as I havent a ****ing clue what you;re going on about tbh

That's step 1.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116769385&postcount=8547

Next you should repeat yourself.

It's so predictable I'd almost swear I was typing at bots.

jmcc

maccored wrote: »

'We' do?

The strategy seems to be to flood the zone. Rather than argue with the points made, this strategy creates its own "arguments" and proceeds to argue with them while ignoring the facts.

As for the attempts to coin phrases like "echo rebuttal" it is, as quite accurately described up-thread, the equivalent of a child running around with his or her fingers in their ears screaming that they can't hear you. There's a kind of desperate literary aspiration to it that is commonly found in the Letters To The Editor page of the Irish Times.

Since people who don't support FG are not considered smart, we have to have such things as a taoiseach leaking a confidential document to his friend "explained". The funny thing is that some of the "smart" FG supporters may have voted for Varadkar as the leader of FG.

The reality is that some FG supporters don't want to admit that Varadkar leaked a confidential document to his friend and is now under criminal investigation. Did anyone mention that?

Regards...jmcc

RandomName2

James Brown wrote: »

Yes.

You keep making assumptions based on the opinions of multiple posters and then assign that view to all of them.
Its at worst dishonest, at best, highly inaccurate.

In this post

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116766120&postcount=8543

I made a prediction about what you would reply with (the text is in white).

I was almost right. You disengage from your own argument, you repeat yourself, and you throw shapes. I didn't expect saying that 'Leo leaked' would require a separate post though.

As amusing as it was getting you to concede ground in relation to your proposition until you have nowhere else to turn, I think that does genuinely sound an end of things for now. Honestly I think doubling down on your position, that you were not saying, what you were clearly saying, was an error on your part.

blanch152 wrote: »

It's only a leak if it's illegal.

'Leak' isn't defined in law. It's a colloquial term (that's mainly used here because it alliterates with Varadkar's first name). There isn't the Leaking Act 2008. Essentially you can say that any disclosure of information to a third party is a leak. This clearly was a leak. For better or worse it happens a lot in Irish politics. There was a leak a few days ago in relation to planned changes in lockdown restrictions. That's no comment on its legality.

shtpEdthePlum

https://twitter.com/TadhgHickey/status/1378316187004772352?s=20

Seeing as the other thread was closed because it's a "non-story", I said I'd post this here.




But apparently boards.ie knows best.

blanch152

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Regularly lying awake at night thinking of Leo at 3am cannot be healthy.

It isn't 3 a.m. in all timezones.

RandomName2

jmcc wrote: »

Rather than argue with the points made

So I'm intrigued (or 'fascinated' as the clearly non pompous or verbose jmcc would say) to see when was the last time you advanced an argument in this thread.

jmcc wrote: »

The facts are that Varadkar leaked a confidential document to his friend O'Tuathail. He asked O'Tuathail for his home address in order to send it directly to O'Tuathail bypassing the NAGP office. That ensured that the leaked confidential document directly reached O'Tuathail instead of running the risk of having been opened by a secretary or other person.

So you may be one who likes repeating themselves, but I am going to point out that I have already dealt with this several times

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116750068&postcount=8470

You chose to ignore it because you just want to say

jmcc wrote: »

No. Varadkar leaked a confidential document, the draft of the agreement that had not been finalised, to his friend O'Tuathail.

jmcc wrote: »

Varadkar leaked a confidential document to his friend O'Tuathail.

jmcc wrote: »

Varadkar, while taoiseach, leaked a confidential document to his friend. Varadkar is now under criminal investigation.

jmcc wrote: »

Varadkar leaked a confidential document to his friend O'Tuathail.

jmcc wrote: »

Varadkar's action of leaking a confidential document to his friend

jmcc wrote: »

Complicated by the fact that Varadkar admitted leaking the document to his friend.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc wrote: »

He has admitted leaking a confidential document to his friend.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc wrote: »

He admitted to leaking a confidential document to a friend.

jmcc wrote: »

The idea is to change the narrative from Varadkar being under criminal investigation for leaking a confidential document

jmcc wrote: »

Not the one that Varadkar leaked to his friend?

jmcc wrote: »

No. Varadkar leaked a confidential document, the draft of the agreement that had not been finalised, to his friend O'Tuathail.

Flood the area is right.

How many times have you echoed? It's damn deafening.

Wow, so anything of actual substance from the clearly non-pompous or verbose jmcc?

jmcc wrote: »

This electoral threat happens to be in a letter to FG TDs/the Heydon letter.

jmcc wrote: »

It is fascinating to watch a crude attempt

NAGP sends a letter to FG TDs which mentions NAGP members campaigning against FG in election. (NAGP/Heydon letter - February 2019)

jmcc wrote: »

Yep. The NAGP/Heydon letter is the actually the most damaging aspect but a lot of commentary seems to be ignoring it. The phrase "political advantage" was mentioned up-thread and the letter warns FG of the electoral implications of NAGP members campaigning against FG in elections. NAGP went into voluntary liquidation in May 2019 and I think that some of the newspaper coverage mentioned that members were holding off on paying subscriptions until they found out what the IMO contract contained.

So again I have addressed this. I know you don't like addressing points to instead say your favorite line, in some sort of Carthago Delenda Est moment (or talk about conspiracies involving FG spin doctors or RTE), but please don't ignore it again or I will consider it akin to a child running around with his or her fingers in their ears screaming that they can't hear you

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116758648&postcount=8504

Non pompously... RandomName2

costacorta

RandomName2 wrote: »

So I'm intrigued (or 'fascinated' as the clearly non pompous or verbose jmcc would say) when the last time you advanced an argument in this thread.



So you may be one who likes repeating themselves, but I am going to point out that I have already dealt with this several times

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116753636&postcount=8476

You chose to ignore it because you just want to say













Flood the area is right.

How many times have you echoed? It's damn deafening.

Wow, so anything of actual substance from the clearly non-pompous or verbose jmcc?







So again I have addressed this. I know you don't like addressing points to instead say your favorite line, in some sort of Carthago Delenda Est moment (or talk about conspiracies involving FG spin doctors or RTE), but please don't ignore it again or I will consider it akin to a child running around with his or her fingers in their ears screaming that they can't hear you

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116758648&postcount=8504

Non pompously... RandomName2

Don’t be wasting your time replying to guys who have nothing else to do in life but bitch about someone 24/7 hoping it might help SF / IRA somehow .

RandomName2

costacorta wrote: »

Don’t be wasting your time replying to guys who have nothing else to do in life but bitch about someone 24/7 hoping it might help SF / IRA somehow .

I don't understand what you are saying.

Why are you trying to distract me.

Did you know

jmcc wrote: »

Varadkar leaked to his friend?

It's fascinating to watch the FG spin trying to distract from the major point which is

jmcc wrote: »

SF has more seats than FG and has more support. Now it has a leader (Varadkar) who has admitted to leaking a confidential document to a friend. SF, being the main opposition party is relentless in pursuit of Varadkar and FG over this.

Why do you keep claiming he didn't leak it to his friend?

RandomName2

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

Seeing as the other thread was closed because it's a "non-story", I said I'd post this here.

But apparently boards.ie knows best.

This is clearly shíteposting, but it's different. It has nothing to do with the thread title, but to be honest nonsense posters like the ones I have been attempting to pin down clearly aren't interested in the subject either.

This at least is original different. So you have my thanks shtpEdthePlum

No pretense that you are confused.

No pretense that you have an argument.

No dodging or squirming around.

Just straightforward #mehole bashing. It sounds both like the Gaelic version of Michael, and like you're describing your anus. Genius.

happyoutscan

RandomName2 wrote: »

So I'm intrigued (or 'fascinated' as the clearly non pompous or verbose jmcc would say) to see when was the last time you advanced an argument in this thread.

I'm intrigued as to if you comprehend that you're continually repeating yourself here on this thread when continually insinuating that others are continually repeating themselves here on this thread.

Has that occurred to you?

costacorta wrote: »

Don’t be wasting your time replying to guys who have nothing else to do in life but bitch about someone 24/7 hoping it might help SF / IRA somehow .

Plenty here - myself included - have no interest helping SF, especially when FFG are giving them all the help they need through their actions (or lack of).

I actually voted for the leaker once upon a time.

RandomName2

happyoutscan wrote: »

I'm intrigued as to if you comprehend that you're continually repeating yourself here

Yes it did. That's why when people ignore my arguments for the last while I have been linking back to previous posts instead of posting the same thing again.

happyoutscan wrote: »

insinuating that others are continually repeating themselves here on this thread.

Oh I'm not insinuating! I'm stating as outright demonstrable fact.

FrancieBrady

RandomName2 wrote: »

Yes it did. That's why when people ignore my arguments for the last while I have been linking back to previous posts instead of posting the same thing again.



Oh I'm not insinuating! I'm stating as outright demonstrable fact.

How many times have you made the same point now?

McMurphy

The thread is literally about Leo Varadkar leaking a confidential document to his friend. Seems odd some people seem to be throwing strops about how many times anyone is mentioning it tbh.

What? Do you think complaining people are posting that Leo admitted leaking confidential information to his pal that the whole thing will go away?

Very, very odd.

RandomName2

McMurphy wrote: »

The thread is literally about Leo Varadkar leaking a confidential document to his friend. Seems odd some people seem to be throwing strops about how many times anyone is mentioning it tbh.

I think the important thing is to remember that Leo leaked a document to a pal.

If it doesn't contribute anything it is just noise.

The thing that you keep trying to dodge is that Leo leaked to his friend.

I don't understand what you are saying.

Why do you keep trying to distract.

Discord bots are able to advance a conversation better.

There you are with your strawman McMurphy.

McMurphy wrote: »

What? Do you think complaining people are posting that Leo admitted leaking confidential information to his pal that the whole thing will go away?

You shouldn't be defending this sort of behavior. I may completely disagree with you, but you are able to advance a point, and reply to someone without red herrings.

If there's a thread on say 9/11 somewhere here on boards, and someone keeps saying 'we must remember that the Saudis flew planes into the twin towers' hundreds of times I would consider that to be trolling. Anybody sane would.

jmcc

McMurphy wrote: »

The thread is literally about Leo Varadkar leaking a confidential document to his friend. Seems odd some people seem to be throwing strops about how many times anyone is mentioning it tbh.

Some are doing it to actively stop the fact that Varadkar leaked a confidential document to his friend being discussed and there is an element of exhibitionism ("Look at me, I'm smarter than you all and that's why it is my thread" type activity) with others.

FG is in a very serious situation if the DPP decides that it should go to trial. This will cause serious problems for FG in that some of the Varadkarites will be targets for the Coveneyites. I think that one of the FGers who lost her seat, Kate O'Connell, was already providing some good quotes for an Irish Examiner article. In a normal political party, there would be a smooth transition to a new leader and that would probably be Coveney. The problem is that FG is not a normal party and it is more likely to tear itself apart. (Dumb and Dumber versus John Bruton, Richard Bruton versus Enda Kenny, and Coveney versus Varadkar with the coronation of Leo the Fifth by the FG Oireachtas Party against the wishes and votes of the FG grassroots.

Regards...jmcc

FrancieBrady

RandomName2 wrote: »

I think the important thing is to remember that Leo leaked a document to a pal.

If it doesn't contribute anything it is just noise.

The thing that you keep trying to dodge is that Leo leaked to his friend.

I don't understand what you are saying.

Why do you keep trying to distract.

Discord bots are able to advance a conversation better.

There you are with your strawman McMurphy.



You shouldn't be defending this sort of behavior. I may completely disagree with you, but you are able to advance a point, and reply to someone without red herrings.

If there's a thread on say 9/11 somewhere here on boards, and someone keeps saying 'we must remember that the Saudis flew planes into the twin towers' hundreds of times I would consider that to be trolling. Anybody sane would.

I click on the thread to read the SAME point being made yet again.

James Brown

RandomName2 wrote: »

In this post

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116766120&postcount=8543

I made a prediction about what you would reply with (the text is in white).

I was almost right. You disengage from your own argument, you repeat yourself, and you throw shapes. I didn't expect saying that 'Leo leaked' would require a separate post though.

As amusing as it was getting you to concede ground in relation to your proposition until you have nowhere else to turn, I think that does genuinely sound an end of things for now. Honestly I think doubling down on your position, that you were not saying, what you were clearly saying, was an error on your part.




'Leak' isn't defined in law. It's a colloquial term (that's mainly used here because it alliterates with Varadkar's first name). There isn't the Leaking Act 2008. Essentially you can say that any disclosure of information to a third party is a leak. This clearly was a leak. For better or worse it happens a lot in Irish politics. There was a leak a few days ago in relation to planned changes in lockdown restrictions. That's no comment on its legality.

You are just running interference at this stage.

James Brown

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I click on the thread to read the SAME point being made yet again.

You can find a point?

James Brown

McMurphy wrote: »

The thread is literally about Leo Varadkar leaking a confidential document to his friend. Seems odd some people seem to be throwing strops about how many times anyone is mentioning it tbh.

What? Do you think complaining people are posting that Leo admitted leaking confidential information to his pal that the whole thing will go away?

Very, very odd.

It seems to be a thing the FG leaning folk do. Try make it foolish to be critical or even speak about things, such as when Leo Varadkar leaked a confidential government negotiation document to his pal, which by the way he is currently under criminal investigation for.

FrancieBrady

James Brown wrote: »

It seems to be a thing the FG leaning folk do. Try make it foolish to be critical or even speak about things, such as when Leo Varadkar leaked a confidential government negotiation document to his pal, which by the way he is currently under criminal investigation for.

Indeed, it is what Regina is routinely sent out to do.

McMurphy

RandomName2 wrote: »

I think the important thing is to remember that Leo leaked a document to a pal.

If it doesn't contribute anything it is just noise.

The thing that you keep trying to dodge is that Leo leaked to his friend.

I don't understand what you are saying.

Why do you keep trying to distract.

Discord bots are able to advance a conversation better.

There you are with your strawman McMurphy.



You shouldn't be defending this sort of behavior. I may completely disagree with you, but you are able to advance a point, and reply to someone without red herrings.

If there's a thread on say 9/11 somewhere here on boards, and someone keeps saying 'we must remember that the Saudis flew planes into the twin towers' hundreds of times I would consider that to be trolling. Anybody sane would.

I don't think you understand the meaning of a strawman argument, this thread is literally about Leo Varadkar, and him passing confidential information to OTuathail, his friend.

It has been preliminary investigated by the Gardai, and after speaking with Simon Harris and a whistleblower from within dept of health (a senior civil servant by all accounts) it has been upgraded to a criminal investigation.

You can argue all day about what law(s) if indeed any that he broke in doing so, but the very heart of the discussion and this thread, and what landed Leo in hot water is literally because he leaked the document to his pal, which he admitted and apologised for.

You have been here arguing everything from the documents initially not being really confidential, Leo as divine leader being authorised to leak the file, and his apology for how he leaked, not that he actually leaked.

Now it's complaining about mentioning the very thing at the heart of the discussion.

That being - Leo leaking a document to his pal.