Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Owen Brannigan

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 103
1
General discussion / Re: Holidays
« on: January 06, 2019, 10:44:30 AM »
Trying to organise the holidays this year! Where are people all time favourite locations?

I was thinking about Sri Lanka, May be too far away however!

Just trying to get some inspiration

Norway

2
General discussion / Re: Ruth Dudley Edwards: a brain to be reckoned with
« on: January 03, 2019, 02:30:36 PM »

I would be in favour of cutting off all types of Oxygen. A one dimensional prehistoric waste of space.

And Ruth Dudley Edwards is not much better.

3
I don't agree with the tax thing but that aside Bono is a hypocritical p***k, a knob and a patronising ass. He talks about helping the poor but counts mass murderers amongst his friends. People who go to see him play music have to put up with his political lectures. It's not begrudgery it's fact. I personally admire people who do well for themselves in their business or careers but this is different.

Take a a few seconds to read what you have posted and how it applies to quite a few others in Ireland.

No one forces anyone to go along to a U2 concert, if you don'† like the 'lectures' sit at home and listen to the music without the commentary you despise.

This is a forum Owen. If I took your approach I might suggest if you don't like my post, ignore it, block me or unregister your account. But that would be stupid. Bono is a very public person and so he deserves scrutiny from the public, whether that be here or elsewhere.

You make my point, as with Bono, you don't need to suggest that if I don't like your post/statements, I have a number of options which all involve ignoring or avoiding you.

Everyone already knows that these options exist and most people exercise them while there are always some others who particularly seek to be offended. 

Happy New Year!

4
I don't agree with the tax thing but that aside Bono is a hypocritical p***k, a knob and a patronising ass. He talks about helping the poor but counts mass murderers amongst his friends. People who go to see him play music have to put up with his political lectures. It's not begrudgery it's fact. I personally admire people who do well for themselves in their business or careers but this is different.

Take a a few seconds to read what you have posted and how it applies to quite a few others in Ireland.

No one forces anyone to go along to a U2 concert, if you don'† like the 'lectures' sit at home and listen to the music without the commentary you despise.

5
Can we just re-name this thread "Begrudgers R Us?"


And hypocrisy....lashings of that going round.

So a major global business relocates to suit its tax affairs - and we're suddenly against this? As Irish people who offer the most liberal corporation tax regime in Europe and the world? As far as I'm aware Bono and his band pay their personal taxes in this country.....unlike the likes of hero JP McManus and others who don't suffer a percentage of the abuse. If ye want U2's global business to pay "it's fair share" what about Google, Facebook, Apple et al? Pure bullshit lads and lassies. How should we decide where Google pay their taxes - where their owner or founder is from? Is that how tax law should be? Absolute rubbish talked about this.

This whole tax thing is just a convenient stick to beat someone who publicises inconvenient truths with.

Well said Seanie, nail hit firmly on the head.

6
General discussion / Re: The IRISH RUGBY thread
« on: December 20, 2018, 08:16:19 PM »
Munster are learning that Carberry is not the man when the pressure is on in European Cup rugby.  He could have kicked them to victory but fluffed his lines.  Hanrahan must be furious being kept off the team to give Carberry his chance to play with Murray.

Carberry missed a host of chances yesterday, he’ll hardly be considered for the World Cup

By moving him to Munster Schmidt has made Carberry the understudy. Other options are not great either with Billy Burns now being talked about. Bleyendaal is injury prone. Ian Keatley, Madigan and Hanrahan? Jackson is gone.

7
General discussion / Re: The IRISH RUGBY thread
« on: December 16, 2018, 06:16:35 PM »
Munster are learning that Carberry is not the man when the pressure is on in European Cup rugby.  He could have kicked them to victory but fluffed his lines.  Hanrahan must be furious being kept off the team to give Carberry his chance to play with Murray.

8
General discussion / Re: TV Show recommendations
« on: December 16, 2018, 06:14:38 PM »
Just watched some series on Walter Presents both French.  Worth considering if you enjoy the Saturday night shows on BBC4.

9
General discussion / Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« on: December 16, 2018, 06:11:16 PM »
I know many legal experts in this and the main thread, that has now been locked, think they didn't deserve to be acquitted but that a separate issue entirely. In the eyes of the law they are innocent of the charges brought against them so why do they have to pay to establish their innocence?

The judge explained that while the jury made their decision to say their guilt had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt the case was so complex that the PPS had been correct to bring the case and so the defendants were not entitled to have their costs returned.

Hence, the crux of the argument regarding having your defence costs repaid by the state is whether the PPS was justified in bringing the case against you regardless of your innocence.  In this case, the judge believed that the PPS was justified.

At the end of the day, Jackson had the money to pay for his defence from his family and with his contract being bought out by IRFU his family will have been paid back in full.  The state paid for most of Olding's bill and he also had his contract bought out by IRFU.

So, few will be worried on whether Jackson and Olding have been repaid by the state other than this case shows how much an individual can spend on defending themselves against charges brought by the PPS. The cost of going to or being in court is now colossal and in many instances legal aid is not available.

Unlike civil proceedings, in criminal proceedings in the North costs do not follow the result that is to say you don’t simply get costs if you win and that applies to both prosecution and defence. There is provision for costs to be awarded in unusual circumstances but as was shown in this case that rarely happens. The rationale being that there is a public interest in prosecuting people and that the PPS shouldn’t be dissuaded from doing that by fear of large costs implications if they are only just incorrect.

Given that in order for a Crown Court prosecution to be brought a directing officer, magistrates court prosecutor, district judge and at least one if not more barristers/advocates will have to have considered the file and all come to the conclusion that there is a reasonable prospect of conviction and then the person has to be innocent and not in receipt of legal aid you can see how the issue of costs will rarely arise.

On a personal level and as usual this is caveated by not being there but I find it very strange that once the case got to the jury and wasn’t dismissed by half time direction that costs were even applied for.  That again makes me think there was plenty that went on in this case that wasn’t reported.

They took it back to reclaim costs because they had the money to pay the additional legal costs involved in giving it a go.  Anyone else would have been so ruined by the initial costs that they wouldn't be able to try it.

10
General discussion / Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« on: December 16, 2018, 10:17:03 AM »
I know many legal experts in this and the main thread, that has now been locked, think they didn't deserve to be acquitted but that a separate issue entirely. In the eyes of the law they are innocent of the charges brought against them so why do they have to pay to establish their innocence?

The judge explained that while the jury made their decision to say their guilt had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt the case was so complex that the PPS had been correct to bring the case and so the defendants were not entitled to have their costs returned.

Hence, the crux of the argument regarding having your defence costs repaid by the state is whether the PPS was justified in bringing the case against you regardless of your innocence.  In this case, the judge believed that the PPS was justified.

At the end of the day, Jackson had the money to pay for his defence from his family and with his contract being bought out by IRFU his family will have been paid back in full.  The state paid for most of Olding's bill and he also had his contract bought out by IRFU.

So, few will be worried on whether Jackson and Olding have been repaid by the state other than this case shows how much an individual can spend on defending themselves against charges brought by the PPS. The cost of going to or being in court is now colossal and in many instances legal aid is not available.

11
General discussion / Re: Death Notices
« on: December 07, 2018, 06:10:55 PM »

12
General discussion / Re: Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.
« on: December 07, 2018, 06:05:21 PM »
See Barry Mcelduff back in the game.

Jobs for the boys. Keep the gravy train running. Choo, Choo!!


Yeah. They are all soooo wealthy. Ching ching.

He had no case to answer according to the prosecution service, yet stood down. Whereas the DUP...

Not quite right, PPS took a decision not to prosecute based on the probability of achieving a conviction, not confirmation of innocence.

13
GAA Discussion / Re: NFL Division 2 2019
« on: December 05, 2018, 03:07:14 PM »
Armagh will have a bit more fire power this year, Jamie Clarke, Stefan Campbell and the two O'Neills from Cross will add another string to the bow. Not sure how Jamie Clarke will fare out, haven’t seen him play in a while and the defensive play teams have not certainly won’t suit him but its definitely something else’s to give the opposition something to think about.
I would also hope James Morgan is on board for next season, a tough hard corner back who you wouldn’t want marking you (can giveaway a fewer frees but is def better on your team)

McGeeney will expect a big year from Armagh and so will the fans...looking forward to it tbh...

It is the last year of the 5 year plan!

14
GAA Discussion / Re: Ulster Club SFC 2018
« on: December 02, 2018, 09:39:52 PM »
Not sure who the referee was but he had a very good match and despite both teams getting bodies back, it was a real battle with no shortage of quality given the conditions.

Referee was Noel Mooney from Cavan. Miles ahead of any other referee in Cavan especially McQuillan.

He did really well in a difficult game with tensions running high and some difficult players on each side.  He took his time and was never the centre of attention that so many of the so called top referees seem to want to be nowadays.  He kept his cool, worked with his officials and took no nonsense from either side.

Fair play to Cassidy at the end of the normal time when he diffused the situation as his players surrounded the referee to complain about his last decision against them and managed to keep some lunatic back from the sideline who was rushing towards the ref.

15
GAA Discussion / Re: Ulster Club SFC 2018
« on: December 02, 2018, 09:35:12 PM »
Athletic grounds surely would have provided a better playing surface for a game of this magnitude, Omagh pitch is renowned for being a wet pitch and there were a few patches with surface water that players had to tread like eggshells around.


It also would have provided an atmosphere for the game which Omagh can never do on any occasion. Unfortunately that would have given the Gweedore people a further 35 miles to travel.

Full credit to the players for keeping their feet throughout the game given the amount of rain that fell in Omagh today. The game must have been in some doubt given the rainfall on Saturday and through the night.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 103