New Minister for Children - Shortest Ministerial career in history or the "new normal"?


Trump if I’m not mistaken, did, in a statement publicly distance himself from Epstein?

" The president claims he banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago for making unwanted sexual advances toward young women"

So, why would it be mentioned in this thread?


Look over there. Omb


Their. Not there.

Even better, “ how about someone who gets his or her picture …”

Because ‘their’ is not singular but ‘someone’ and ‘his/her’ is.



The issues here, as I see it, are as follows …

1 - Has Tatchell expressed views in the past that are deemed beyond the pale by most with regard to what, in legal terms, is defined as child rape?

2- Is Tatchell a member of the Green Party?

3 - Do the Green Party as a whole endorse Tatchells historical views on the issue? If not, do they disavow the individual in question?

4- Do Fine Gael and Fianna Fail stand by their coalition partners in this instance.

The answer to the first question above appears to be a resounding yes.

The answer to the second appears also to be Yes.

The answers to the other two questions flowing from the first appear to be less clear.


Yep indeedy, the political leaders have stepped out and supported Roderic as well as the ground troops, Eamon Ryan the man from Del Monte, he say “Yes!”


I don’t know what a tracker mortgage is


Mild-mannered he may be, but Matt Cooper will go 10 rounds with anyone :roll_eyes:


From the IT propaganda puff piece:

All in all, Cooper’s forensic examination dispels any doubt that O’Gorman was the victim of a smear. When it comes to getting the facts right, Cooper will go toe to toe with anyone.

Nial Boylan show, snippet: Tatchell “Children are not the property of parents”

I wonder how this Boylan’s interview compares to Coopers interview (full interview) -


I’d advise anyone to listen back to the Tatchell interview with Cooper. It was effectively a press release on behalf of Tatchell and the Green party


That’s what I took for the comments around it at the time, fire up the link if you have it handy.


The Last Word Jul 7

LISTEN BACK: @PeterTatchell
gives his response to controversial comments that were made in 1997 and says he has always condemned child sex abuse.


I think the extreme Twitter Trans Activists are the most effective Terrorist group in the world right now.

They’re small in size but they have successfully conducted an overthrow of the Liberal Left, they’ve bent it to their will, destroyed opponents of much higher profile and managed to quickly normalize institutionalized Child abuse in the form of hormone therapy for teens whose parents oppose it.

This Entryism strategy has been awesomely effective . It’s like as if Markus Wolf was running them.


Just another name for Infiltration.


Marcus Wolf and Margot Hoeneker


There was a protest outside the Dail opposing the Minister for Children Roderic O’Gorman on Saturday, the Burkean posted their video of Antifa’s attempted disruptions which appear to have been swiftly countered by some of the original crowd, the video got retweeted by Paul Joseph Watson on the 11th and has has now surpassed 750,000 views.

Paul Joseph Watson @PrisonPlanet

Imagine protesting against an anti-pedophilia event.


Closing in on 800,000 views, will it hit a million?


Watson being a homosexual himself. Plus they had Paddy Manning speak on Saturday who is also gay.

Must really frustrate Antifa et al they can’t squeal ‘homophobes!’ at the campaign to remove O’Gorman


Some interesting recent but historical context, another demonisation vector to nail Putin on (see a pattern here) in the current context. More might find they agree with not propagandising children, if they can put two and two together in relation and see past the institutional euphaimsims.

Oliver Stone Said Russia’s “Anti-Gay Propaganda” Law Seems “Sensible”

…Stone reminded Putin that when they’d spoken previously, the longtime leader said that Russia doesn’t propagate homosexuality. “Not exactly,” Putin replied. “We have a law banning propaganda among minors.”

“Yes, that’s the one,” Stone agreed. “It seems like maybe that’s a sensible law.”

**“It is aimed at allowing people to reach maturity and then decide who they are and how they want to live,” Putin said. “**There are no restrictions at all after this.”

But in 2017, Europe’s top human rights court ruled that the Russian law actually violates several international agreements written to protect free speech and prohibit discrimination.

“Above all, by adopting such laws the Court found that the authorities had reinforced stigma and prejudice and encouraged homophobia, which was incompatible with the values — of equality, pluralism and tolerance — of a democratic society,” the European Court of Human Rights wrote in its decision.

It is not clear as of yet why Stone was in Moscow to chat with Putin…

I don’t know too much beyond this buzzedup article on the european courts ruling, but I didn’t think free speech extended to the rights of children since they are in the care of their parents as a rule, and are not legally adults, but maybe when courts get invovled it changes, but if that is the plan, if the insidious argument is that we must confer adult rights onto children, then why stop post womb, make it apply all the way back to in-utero, where that pre-child-child has freedom of birth, because life is life, of course you might need to stop at the point where a sperm and egg clearly can not speak for their good selves (but if a snake can tempt one with an Apple, maybe there is a case to be made), are the physical actions an extension of the human expression of freedom to express love or hate with physical actions emanating beyond the body, and to stop such activities or emanations, then is it a denial of human rights to express love or hate or will some love be deemed a hate crime, perhaps the oppressive heteronormative love that makes humans will be classed as hatespeech in action?

Any ideas where this is all going? :whistle:


Gran Torino channel has posted up the John Connors speech as an “independent speaker” outside Lenister House, gives a fairly clear synopsis and overview of the whole controversy in less than 9 minutes.


Sounds like a Green Party branch meeting. Who was keeping the minutes ? :grinning: