Messages

My da has fibrus and they added a "safety" block there recently. I had to log in and disable it. I had been keeping an eye out for it as my provider warned us the internet companies were doing it.

How might one naviagte to the setting to disable it? Asking for a friend.

He implicitly linked immigration to (unproven) rising crime and unsafe streets. It's ok though, he said very little and he did say "it's not the only reason".

Isn't that how it works?

as I posted earlier, I haven't seen the abuse he received and would be interested to see it, if anyone could share some of it. 

all i see is support and i think it is scary how many people seem to think he said nothing wrong.

In your mind what did he say that was actually wrong. Shutting down conversations on topics is what create problems

What he said that was verifiably wrong has been spelled out numerous times in the last few pages. I don't intend to repeat myself, save to ask one question:

He claimed that "the government does not allow people to express their concerns" about immigration. If that is true (and we've been told by the great and the good that he didnt say anything that wasn't true), then do we know yet what gulag the regime has sent him to for publically expressing his concerns?

He implicitly linked immigration to (unproven) rising crime and unsafe streets. It's ok though, he said very little and he did say "it's not the only reason".

Isn't that how it works?

as I posted earlier, I haven't seen the abuse he received and would be interested to see it, if anyone could share some of it. 

all i see is support and i think it is scary how many people seem to think he said nothing wrong.

In your mind what did he say that was actually wrong. Shutting down conversations on topics is what create problems

Very little of what he said was statistically factual if you bothered checking. He also tried to suggest migration was linked to standard of living which is a load of horsesh!t, and then claimed that the government doesn't allow people to talk about immigration, even though he was literally doing so on social media to his thousands of followers.

And yet we still have the great and the good coming out in droves to defend him, insisting "he didn't say anything that wasn't true". Its actually very unsettling how right wing/racist lies are becoming so widely defended as perfectly true and normal and acceptable as soon as a mainstream figure like Noone starts peddling them.

[what he said was moderate enough and quite accurate.]

never heard of this Noone fella until yesterday but what he said was moderate enough and quite accurate.

He repeated the racist trope that quality of living is linked to migration which anyone with a quarter of a braincell left understands is absolute horsesh!t.

As is his claim that quality of life is declining. Just about every study in recent years on the topic has found quality of life has been rising.

He also said, in a video freely posted on social media to his thousands of followers, that the government stops people talking about immigration.

He also claimed that our towns are becoming less safe, and that this was at least in part as a result of immigration. Even though recent years has seen a decline in homicides (and related offences), in thefts and in drug offences.

His video just contained a succession of unsubstantiated and/or plainly innacurate claims and the fact that so many people, even numerous SF TDs and supporters who youd expect to be calling out the spreading of right wing falsehoods, are racing to defend him, is a sad indication of the direction of travel society is heading in. As is the fact that such plain falsehoods - first peddled by the far right - are repeated often enough online, they will eventually start to be repeated by more mainstream folk like Noone, and before you know it, twitter/gaaboard etc are filled with people blindly and stupidly accepting his/their anti-immigration falsehoods as "moderate enough and quite accurate".

F**k Fianna Fáil and f**k Fine Gael.

https://x.com/wereontheditch/status/1902369119988597211?t=YSO9T_nrUOR0C2VgQ_YuYA&s=19
A flight carrying 150kg of replenishments for Israel's bombing of Gaza illegally passed through Irish airspace this morning – hours after Israel killed more than 400 people.
Last week government 'distanced itself' from plans to inspect these planes.

I am not sure that the ceasefire will be ended. It is backed by Trump. Netanyahu was forced into it.

Hate to say I told you so, but...

I read some time ago that any time Israel has been an offensive in Gaza which co-incided with the inauguration of a US President, they have always ceased the assualt, temporarily, for the inauguration and for a short term after it, before resuming their slaughter. This is history repeating itself.

The wasted life to be no further on 30 odd years later...

No further on?

Been stopped by the British Army recently have you? Or the RUC?

Yeah all those deaths were worth not getting stopped...

Funny enough was stopped last year when there was a dissident threats.

And we are no further on

Did they dish out any sectarian harassment, humiliate you, threaten you, abuse or assault you? Did armed British soldiers arrive from a nearby barracks? Were the UDR there? Reckon they took your details and passed them onto loyalist paramilitaries?

Yeah you must be right then. Nothing has changed in the last 30 odd years.

Who knows? Wouldn't have too much on me in fairness

But what I do know is SF sit in local government with the DUP now, and maybe, just maybe had we looked at doing that in the late 60's we'd have family friends work colleagues alive today.

Be rest assured though, those deaths didn't bring about being stopped by the peelers, it was plain old politics. So again wasted lives. There won't be, unfortunately, a UI in our lifetime

Looked at power sharing in the late 60s? Is that a serious comment?

And no, the deaths of four specific Volunteers in Clonoe didn't bring about the changes we have today, and yes politics did. But that political process was only possible because of IRA campaign. John Major's government had to be bombed into serious negotiations. That's just a matter of historical record.

But hold on, are you now saying there has been a change? I thought you said nothing has changed in 30 odd years?

The wasted life to be no further on 30 odd years later...

No further on?

Been stopped by the British Army recently have you? Or the RUC?

Yeah all those deaths were worth not getting stopped...

Funny enough was stopped last year when there was a dissident threats.

And we are no further on

Did they dish out any sectarian harassment, humiliate you, threaten you, abuse or assault you? Did armed British soldiers arrive from a nearby barracks? Were the UDR there? Reckon they took your details and passed them onto loyalist paramilitaries?

Yeah you must be right then. Nothing has changed in the last 30 odd years.

The wasted life to be no further on 30 odd years later...

No further on?

Been stopped by the British Army recently have you? Or the RUC?

These are the details, outlined in today's ruling, of what the British forces tried to deny was a case of "shoot-to-kill"

You are the one arguing about it, so contestable enough for you. Only one person brought up Omagh, there were plenty others that could have been used

I really don't know what point you're trying to make with this "Only one person brought up Omagh, there were plenty others that could have been used" bit again.

Of course he could have brought up any event. But he didn't. It was very specifically the Omagh Bombing he lied about, so that's the one I am calling him out for lying about.

Again as pointed out, he said IRA he wasn't specific on which one, but you've put him straight on that

Yes because when he said the IRA bombed Omagh, he certainly wasn't trying to suggest it was the PIRA eh? Perish the very thought.

Outside of members of the Real IRA, have you ever met anyone who refers to it in conversation as "the IRA" rather than the "Real IRA"? Yeah me neither.

When you have to go to that level of ridiculousness in search of an argument, then maybe its time to reflect of whether you're just being more than a little bit of a contrarian.

You are the one arguing about it, so contestable enough for you. Only one person brought up Omagh, there were plenty others that could have been used

I really don't know what point you're trying to make with this "Only one person brought up Omagh, there were plenty others that could have been used" bit again.

Of course he could have brought up any event. But he didn't. It was very specifically the Omagh Bombing he lied about, so that's the one I am calling him out for lying about.

The SAS in Clonoe that night showed just as much disregard for human suffering as the IRA did for the people of Omagh in 1998.  One group just as bad as the other.

The IRA had precisely nothing to do with the Omagh bomb.

Are you saying it was the Bad IRA who planted the Omagh bomb and not the Good IRA.⁸

Are you saying the PIRA and the Real IRA are the same organisation?

Well they were until a few months before Omagh, no?

And? Were they the same organisation by 15th August 1998?

In fairness LC didn't say "which" IRA did Omagh..

I'm gunna go out on a limb here and suggest that he meant the IRA that everyone on this earth refers to when they say "the IRA" in relation to the troubles. And its not the Real IRA. I'll also go as far as to say that you know that too. Which makes me wonder why you posted that at all.

The SAS in Clonoe that night showed just as much disregard for human suffering as the IRA did for the people of Omagh in 1998.  One group just as bad as the other.

The IRA had precisely nothing to do with the Omagh bomb.

Are you saying it was the Bad IRA who planted the Omagh bomb and not the Good IRA.

Are you saying the PIRA and the Real IRA are the same organisation?

Let's not get into the specifics, he coulda used Enniskillen

He could have said any attack, but he didn't. He said Omagh. You might call it "semantics" to attempt to be accurate in stating who killed 31 people but I wouldn't.

I wonder if I tried to suggest that anyone other than the PIRA bombed Enniskillen would you back me and accuse anyone who tried to correct me of "semantics"?

It's doesn't matter to be fair, he possibly thought with today's inquiries into Omagh he'd throw it out. Not accurate of course.

I'm not here to back anyone and their views either, I've mine and you have yours

I've said countless times, had you been brought up in the village down the road your view on this place would be entirely different. An accident of birth

The SAS in Clonoe that night showed just as much disregard for human suffering as the IRA did for the people of Omagh in 1998.  One group just as bad as the other.

The IRA had precisely nothing to do with the Omagh bomb.

Are you saying it was the Bad IRA who planted the Omagh bomb and not the Good IRA.

Are you saying the PIRA and the Real IRA are the same organisation?

Let's not get into the specifics, he coulda used Enniskillen

He could have said any attack, but he didn't. He said Omagh. You might call it "semantics" to attempt to be accurate in stating who killed 31 people but I wouldn't.

I wonder if I tried to suggest that anyone other than the PIRA bombed Enniskillen would you back me and accuse anyone who tried to correct me of "semantics"?

It's doesn't matter to be fair, he possibly thought with today's inquiries into Omagh he'd throw it out. Not accurate of course.

I'm not here to back anyone and their views either, I've mine and you have yours

I've said countless times, had you been brought up in the village down the road your view on this place would be entirely different. An accident of birth

The SAS in Clonoe that night showed just as much disregard for human suffering as the IRA did for the people of Omagh in 1998.  One group just as bad as the other.

The IRA had precisely nothing to do with the Omagh bomb.

Are you saying it was the Bad IRA who planted the Omagh bomb and not the Good IRA.

Are you saying the PIRA and the Real IRA are the same organisation?

Let's not get into the specifics, he coulda used Enniskillen

He could have said any attack, but he didn't. He said Omagh. You might call it "semantics" to attempt to be accurate in stating who killed 31 people but I wouldn't.

I wonder if I tried to suggest that anyone other than the PIRA bombed Enniskillen would you back me and accuse anyone who tried to correct me of "semantics"?

It's doesn't matter to be fair, he possibly thought with today's inquiries into Omagh he'd throw it out. Not accurate of course.

I'm not here to back anyone and their views either, I've mine and you have yours

I've said countless times, had you been brought up in the village down the road your view on this place would be entirely different. An accident of birth

What village one grows up in, and the right if people to have their own views has precisely nothing to do with the point.

When a group kills 31 people, then it's right and proper that we at least be truthful about what group that was and to not knowingly lie about it.

Hardly a contestable point, I'd have thought.