If you're the police, who'll police the police?



The charges were trumped up and would never have been brought against protesters from another demographic.

The reality is that what the status quo fears most (including the likes of yourself quite clearly) is a disciplined, motivated working class capable of standing up to physical intimidation a la the water charges campaign. This stuff is all about optics and the messages that such optics send out with regard to the exercise of mastery and servility…and in this case, such standards as they generally apply across society have been dealt a severe blow.

…which brings us on to the stupidity of the current left’s own approach to the creation of a movement capable of challenging said status quo. On the one hand they are pushing the line that Jobstown was an example of the most marginalised in society standing up to the powers that be and are toting it as a success on that basis as well as an example of what could potentially be achieved by a proper, focussed left alternative in terms of mobilising people in opposition to the status quo. However, they have a major problem in so far as if any of these men who were charged (leaving aside Murphy) were to walk into a left leaning political meeting in Ireland currently as novices and seek to engage with the rest of the room, they would immediately be required to acknowledge their own ‘privilege’ on the basis of their race and gender (and maybe sexual orientation) and their contribrutions would be devalued accordingly. If anything, Jobstown highlights the need on the part of any movement to have strong men at its heart who are capable of standing up to physical intimidation. Theres also a reason why feminist or LBGT movements and protests are a lot more acceptable to the powers that be than a movement based around a genuine societal-wide economic analysis that identifies the true enemy…


Woh, that put me in my place - via la revolution :slight_smile:

However I still wonder whether Paul Murphy or any of the protestors would be happy to see mother wife/mother exposed in the same manner to a mob (or a peaceful protest as some would call it).


What other demographic would have protested in this way?

Don’t get me wrong, other groups like farmers, taxi drivers and hauliers have engaged in some pretty obnoxious protesting in the past and should have been prosecuted also. But they never reached the mob depths of this ‘peaceful protest’ lot.

Paul offered the opinion on Newstalk that the right of a politician to move freely about the country had to be balanced with the right to protest - basically asking for a carte blanche for civil disobedience. Your right to protest should end when you start inconveniencing other people.


I wonder what Paul Murphy’s reaction would have been if protesters had been hauled out of the way by Gardai? (we’ve been there before :unamused: )

Interesting to note the SJW reaction to a journalist told she has a nice smile compared to reaction to the dog’s abuse handed out to a woman (for having the temerity to accept an invite to a school; same unapologetic goons will complain that Jobstown has a bad rep/ applications will be turned down because of their address)


But they werent prosecuted…and never would be, basically because they are people like ‘us’.

As are the feminists and the gays.

Jobstown heads arent (or at least are perceived as not being so)…because they dont really aspire to membership of the respectable end of society as per the others. Traditionally, many havent even been voters and when they have voted have often gone for the likes of Sinn Fein. Witness the types of descriptive labels being bandied about on this thread.

You can argue the toss about the nature of the protest. However, the facts are that the men were found not guilty of the charges against them…and nobody has been convicted on the basis of anything that occurred that day ie in strict legal terms, nothing criminal occurred despite an overwhelming sense to the contrary having been presented in media and official circles…

In political and social terms the anti-water charges movement was really just a release for a build up of frustration and anger on the part of ordinary (most non-politically aligned) people who had felt the brunt of austerity on the back of the bailing out of the banks…and in this regard blocking the movement of somebody’s car for two hours pales in comparison to bankrupting a country and stealing from every taxpayer in Ireland (IMO).

I can guarantee you Im no SJW type but to my mind the whole episode stinks, both in terms of the quite obviously politically motivated decision to proceed with charges that were ultimately thrown out by the Judge and the appalling spectacle of the same Judge instructing a jury to disregard the testimony of Gardai.

Sometimes you just have to acknowledge when mistakes are made. The State ballsed this entire thing up from the get go and it became an out and out fiasco.


I wouldn’t claim to know the mind of these purported SJWs, but perhaps they hold the president of the United States to a higher standard of behaviour than some random punter in a water charges protest.


ah now. Would you rather Trump told your wife she’d a nice smile or someone else called her what Murphy’s gang in Jobstown called Joan Burton?

Do you think that if random punter (or mob thereof) in say an anti-abortion rally used the same language towards a woman (and trapped her in her car) it would get more or less coverage?

The DPP should have pressed charges on Public Order offences but the stink of hypocrisy from people pretending what happened to Joan Burton was OK in a democracy is overwhelming


That’s my point, you’re holding them to the same standard of behaviour.

As for your question: I’d refer the matter to my wife as I’m not in the habit of getting offended on behalf of other people, an accusation which is ironically often directed at SJWs. Are you an SJW? They’re everywhere. :smiley:


I’m not in the habit of getting offended on behalf of others.

I know my wife/mother/sister would be very upset if she were in that situation and I’m sure you and yours would be also even if you’re too invested in the argument to concede it.

If Trump told her she’d a nice smile she’d be embarrassed and think he was a sexist asshole but given his track record she’d probably think it was a less unpleasant experience that an encounter with Murphy and his scummy posse


I cant work it out, thats why Im asking, do you know?


Here’s the closest I can get to a primary source on the topic of the Garda evidence.

*She also said the video footage should be the primary source of evidence for the jury to consider.

“That is not to say that it is not possible for certain events not to have been captured by video footage but it must be regarded by you as the primary and most reliable source.”

Video footage had at times contradicted witness testimony and was not subject to the “frailties of human memory,” she said.*


Perjury or just unreliable evidence?

The camera records what happened (or at least what could be seen to have happened from one point through its lens).
Human testimony relies on a fallible memory and unintentional and often unconscious bias.
People filter and select without even intending to. The video couldn’t do that, unless somebody tampered with it. In that sense, it’s a “purer” testimony.

Edit: Skippy beat me to it while I was posting.


Here’s an interesting story. Worth reading and asking yourself what the fuck are the Gardaí being used for?


Edit: Just looking at the number of tweets by @sanepolitico about Regina Doherty. Out of a total number of 30,500 tweets, 26 tweets this year and 120 last year. How in the name of God can Garda time be wasted intimidating people over something like this?


irishtimes.com/news/ireland … um=twitter


I’d heard of her and thought she was just a particularly enthusiastic sniping blueshirt.
Like a female Alan Farell. Popular behaviour with party faithful. I heard her today on RTE radio and now I think she’s actually mad - she was being asked about whether things were climb downs or U-turns. She was going nuts. She just seems like a massive narcissist

The thing you don’t want to do with a narcissist is keep bringing up their massive personal business failure. They’re not gonna like that one bit.


I read the blog post linked to to in the Broadsheet article. It makes three claims about Regina Doherty which appear to me to be to be demonstrably false and consequently defamatory.

That said, it would seem to be something suited to pursuit in the civil courts, so I am not sure why the Guards were involved.


I imagine the whole thing with Catherine Kelly and Regina Doherty will end up being an outstanding example of the Streisand effect.

Simon Coveney is excelling himself with the oul PR also. Jesus.


Which is possibly why she got the Gardai involved rather than pursuing it through the courts.

I find the “good name” provision in the Irish constitution to be a bit incongruous when applied to politicians.


The shinners are true masters of social media.

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not know if the US based blogger in question is not a member of any political party. However her partner Jim Cullen is the head of Friends of Sinn Fein.

Again there is no connection between an article most likely slanderous and a SF agenda to undermine a political rival. A funny conincedence all the same :slight_smile:


irishexaminer.com/viewpoints … harebutton