Sean Brady stands down - 2

Started by muppet, October 17, 2014, 10:33:37 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

muppet

There is no way in hell a blatant Tony Fearon lie gets the last word.

QuoteHe did not silence anyone.People silence themselves,parents failed to get to the root cause of their children's angst.

'He did not silence anyone'.

Despite Sean Brady's signature appearing on the Oath of Silence of two children, Tony now says it was the children's fault for signing, but somehow it is also the parents fault. Thus it is the children's fault, 'people silence themselves', where Brady is concerned, but the parents aren't granted any such alibi, because Tony needs to find an adult scapegoat for Brady.

Ultimately, according to Tony Fearon, it was anyone's and everyone's fault, except the man who organised and signed the Oaths of Silence. Brady and two other clerics were the only adults in the room. Brady was the only person who was in both rooms. Brady was the only one to sign both Oaths.

If Brady hadn't signed the Oaths there was no oath. By signing he de facto silenced the boys.
MWWSI 2017

T Fearon

People consent to be silenced.Unless Sean Brady removed their tongues they consented to silence.

johnneycool

Quote from: T Fearon on October 17, 2014, 11:16:23 AM
People consent to be silenced.Unless Sean Brady removed their tongues they consented to silence.

In that case tone, be careful what you tell the priest in the confessional as he could trot off to the nearest cop shop and give evidence against you, eh?

muppet

Quote from: T Fearon on October 17, 2014, 11:16:23 AM
People consent to be silenced.Unless Sean Brady removed their tongues they consented to silence.

Who brought the Oaths into the rooms?
Who was the Canon Lawyer in the rooms?
Who stood to benefit from the silence?
What adult signed the Oaths?
Who faced punishment for a breach of the Oaths?

But you blame the children, all to hang on to your completely delusional fantasy that Brady did nothing wrong.

MWWSI 2017

AZOffaly


muppet

#5
Quote from: AZOffaly on October 17, 2014, 12:33:11 PM
Ah lads. For f**k's sake.

I have no objection to anyone shutting down this or the other thread.

But the deeply offensive rant that Brendan Smyth's abused victims somehow silenced themselves could not be allowed to pass without comment.
MWWSI 2017

easytiger95

I think we really need to redefine what we mean by a "last word" when it comes to Tone. Myself, I'm leaning towards an old saying about pigs and grunts.

No point bothering yourself Muppet. Tony has done all the damage that he can do. He's flogging a dead horse, but that doesn't mean we should give him the keys to the dog food factory.


AhNowRef

#7
Quote from: muppet on October 17, 2014, 12:49:42 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on October 17, 2014, 12:33:11 PM
Ah lads. For f**k's sake.

I have no objection to anyone shutting down this or the other thread.

But the deeply offensive rant that Brendan Smyth's abused victims somehow silenced themselves could not less be allowed to pass without comment.

Agreed .. Another pathetic splurge from a disgusting individual ... Lock this thread now too before the paedophile facilitation appreciation society member can add more vile nonsense....

I'd also suggest people who have seen this thread remember the disgraceful views of said poster (this is serious stuff) when they see him jovially posting on other threads ...... It will be a bit like anytime I see Brady's face on TV .. enough to make you sick !!


T Fearon

Like it or not, an oath is in effect a contract between two complicit parties, therefore it has no legitimate merit in this argument. I'm sure if the kids had been asked to put their hands in the fire they would have refused. Again I ask about the negligence of the parents.

brokencrossbar1

Quote from: T Fearon on October 17, 2014, 02:23:41 PM
Like it or not, an oath is in effect a contract between two complicit parties, therefore it has no legitimate merit in this argument. I'm sure if the kids had been asked to put their hands in the fire they would have refused. Again I ask about the negligence of the parents.

Tony would you ever f**k up,  here is a situation where we had vulnerable victims, an over-bearing organisation who had a vice-like grip over the congregants.  Brady abused his position full stop as they the church as a whole.  The context of Ireland and the influence of the church over the average day Joe can not be underestimated.   For you to lay any blame at the door of the parents says more about you and your gutter level morals than it does about the parents and even the 'poor' Sean Brady only doing his job.

muppet

Quote from: T Fearon on October 17, 2014, 02:23:41 PM
Like it or not, an oath is in effect a contract between two complicit parties, therefore it has no legitimate merit in this argument. I'm sure if the kids had been asked to put their hands in the fire they would have refused. Again I ask about the negligence of the parents.

Tony. as usual you are making stuff up.  A child cannot sign a contract under Irish law, nor indeed the law in any country that values its children. Even if they could, they would be entitled to independent advice before signing it, thus voiding the contract in the absence of independent advice.

You would think a Canon Lawyer might know that. But then, he didn't see it the way you do I suspect.

QuoteI'm sure if the kids had been asked to put their hands in the fire they would have refused

Do you have an ounce of comprehension of what Smyth did to them? He made them do things, against their will, for his own pleasure. This was the nature of the abuse. Are you saying they consented all along?

MWWSI 2017

T Fearon

Read this very carfeully. The Church's attempt to protect it's reputation was deeply flawed and the wrong course of action.Victims were not given due consideration. But to blame it all on a 36 year old Priest, whose only crime was to rise to the rank of Cardinal over 30 years later. is equally wrong.

As for the Children, they should have told their parents, they should hav been reared with the ethos of telling their parents about anything or anyone endangering them, just like the two young boys did in my tenuous work related experience of the horrors of child abuse in the late 1970s.

theskull1

It's a lot easier to sing karaoke than to sing opera

imtommygunn

You illustrate how anyone can rationalise anything that they want to. You've rationalised this to be the parents fault and now the children for not telling anyone. If you were in fact to listen to you the victims and the parents sound about as bad as the abuser.

You have a special gift. Just when people think you can go no lower you do.