Clerical abuse!

[Itchy]

John Mc Areavey facing some stinging criticism for his staunch defence of Uncle Bishop John Mc Areavey.I would say some people would be having a rethink about his charitable foundation.He is deluded if he thinks his Uncle was being treated unfairly by the media victims of the abuse are the people who need justice.

He is to charity what Willie Frazer is to charity, judging by his comments yesterday.

[David McKeown]

I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

[Minder]

Not sure why John McAreavey thought his input was needed

[Targetman]

"He has always acted with people's best intentions at heart" quote from John McAreavey, try telling that to the victims of Finnegan!

[Minder]

"He has always acted with people's best intentions at heart" quote from John McAreavey, try telling that to the victims of Finnegan!

Yeah that was absolutely ridiculous

[Farrandeelin]

Where the hell did deiseach disappear to?

[Taylor]

The problem recently on the board is that some posters go running to mods or revert to insults if someone else's opinion doesn't match theirs.

This is one of the few discussion forums worth posting on and fair play to those that are in charge 

[Owen Brannigan]

I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

That is untypical and very strong input from you David and given that it is from you it carries considerable weight and casts another light on the bishop.

[David McKeown]

I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

That is untypical and very strong input from you David and given that it is from you it carries considerable weight and casts another light on the bishop.

As I say it's from personal experience of a number of meetings with the man in the early noughties and a number of references he made about it being us against them which when I questioned him he confirmed meant Catholics against protestants. He made plenty of other comments in a similar vein. I had/have very little time for the man.

[longballin]

The problem recently on the board is that some posters go running to mods or revert to insults if someone else's opinion doesn't match theirs.

This is one of the few discussion forums worth posting on and fair play to those that are in charge 

only person I ever reported to Mods was Fearon and if you think his comments last night is no more than someone else's  opinion you're as deluded as him

[longballin]

Ach now you're exaggerating. Fearon didn't say anything last night.

  night before... right enough  he vanished last nite after hitting the delete button a few times

[smelmoth]

I'm not buying any of that.

Did you even read any of the links I supplied?

We have a thread where are posts announcing the guilt of named individuals of rape. That's not libel then? They are doing so during a criminal trial  - is that not contempt of court?

Tony's posts are deleted but the content of those posts and who posted them remains on this site where others have quited them. Does that somehow give the site a protection against the libel laws they fear?

The owners of this website are the only people who can answer as to why they feel such posts are permitted/remain on this site. IANAL.

And yes, some comments posted by users on the said threads concerning ongoing legal cases could be not so much libellous, but be in contempt of court. For reference, the ongoing case involved in the "Ulster Rugby Trial" thread is not allowed to be discussed on prominent forums like boards.ie whilst the trial is ongoing, and most online news websites which allow user comments that report on ongoing trials usually don't allow comments to be left on pages covering such cases.

If you feel that your position is correct, I am more than happy to read the relevant links supplying evidence or arguments from people involved in this field to support your POV.

What I will say is that as someone whom in the past has created multiple websites, both GAA & non-GAA related, I've regularly read up carefully about what legal responsibilities I carry as a website creator, owner or contributor. I mentioned earlier about An Fear Rua, this was from a statement the site's owner made when he closed its forum...

There is a sense that they can just register under a pseudonym, pay nothing towards the upkeep of the site or towards an insurance against libel matched by a total lack of any attempt to even understand – let alone accept – that I have a right, and a duty, to administer this site in accordance with the law and in the interests of everyone who used it.

https://www.thejournal.ie/an-fear-rua-closed-591514-Sep2012/

Relevant thread discussing the AFR board closure on this forum linked below.

http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=22171.0

Yes I did read your links.

My point is that it does not in any way seem likely that the reason for deleting Tony's posts was the libel laws. My reason for saying do is that other posts that sail as close to if not closer to that particular wind have not been deleted. This disparity would need explanation and it manifestly has not bee explained.

Your point is that the libel laws are tough on website operators and you post a load of links.

Now as for your links:
Total number of links to legal decisions against website operators: Nil
Total number of links to financial penalties against website operators: Nil

[Orior]

I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

That is untypical and very strong input from you David and given that it is from you it carries considerable weight and casts another light on the bishop.

As I say it's from personal experience of a number of meetings with the man in the early noughties and a number of references he made about it being us against them which when I questioned him he confirmed meant Catholics against protestants. He made plenty of other comments in a similar vein. I had/have very little time for the man.

That is interesting. We always hear about clergy working together but of course they are humans like ourselves and can have opinions. For example, I thought the protestant clergy could have done a lot more during the Holy Cross trouble. But then, perhaps clergy have to look after their own flock first.

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.

[Milltown Row2]

Having opinions and being human is all well and good, but dealing with him being bigot and not referring to others (like the prodestant clergy at Holy Cross) to look at as some sort of excuse would be better!


So much for the turning the other cheek and love thy neighbour!

[Orior]

Having opinions and being human is all well and good, but dealing with him being bigot and not referring to others (like the prodestant clergy at Holy Cross) to look at as some sort of excuse would be better!


So much for the turning the other cheek and love thy neighbour!

I also respect David McKeown's view, but I will not cast Bishop McAreavy as a bigot until David's view has been triangulated. What I am saying is that they clearly must tend to their own flock.