Ireland politics


You imagine or you think?

The inference is quite clear from Kitty and her standard line of reporting. In her head it’s all because we don’t give enough, but where is the balance?

  • chap mentions he dropped out of school and did FÁS courses. Who paid for that?
  • chap mentions “the drugs came along” and he therefore couldn’t hold down a job. They didn’t just come along, he chose to do them.
  • chap mentions college wasn’t put in front of him. By who? Ireland has some of the lowest cost third level education in the Western Hemisphere, it being free for for under privelaged people.
  • Kitty talks about how filthy the area is. Whose fault is that? She juxtaposes that with clean Ballsbridge. Does Kitty realize why private housing estate are actually so clean? Has she ever heard of residents associations? If you walk around an area like Poppintree in Ballymun, the majority of homes are kept clean and tidy, but there is a strong minority who do not give a flying fuck and have rubbish strewn across the place. That is a culture failure, but in Kittyland, that is the State’s fault.

Kitty diagnoses the problem but doesn’t understand the cure. She and her ilk will always blame the mythical hand of government and society. The problem is personal responsibility and culture. You can’t say that though as it is “vilification” in loony lefty land. People like herself and the hard left will always default to this and they are ably abetted by the Poverty industry who get unlimited amounts of time to petition for more money in our media. There is no leadership in these communities and from politicians, they go for the easy answers. It’s always somebodies else’s fault and the money tree will fix all.

The majority of journalists in Ireland default to the above analysis as they are incapable of critical thinking or having actual expertise in an area. The fact that you have failed in life to join this cohort is pretty funny.


So, in answer to my question, it’s pretty clear the answer was yes, the sum total of your problem with Kitty Holland’s work is that you don’t like issues regarding the most vulnerable in society being highlighted.

But sure we already knew that.

You could have saved yourself all that typing and just admitted it straight off, instead of launching into a cliched, incoherent rant against poor people which reeks of the sort of posh boy arrogance, know nothingness and sense of entitlement that people like Holland so rightly rail against.

You’re a walking cliche and you don’t even realise it.


Well done you. I hope doing so brightened up your day because it’s obvious you have fuck all else to brighten it up, except perhaps fantasising about rape, you freak.

Sad, sad, little man that you are.


so still no answer of whether you told the girl about your sick fantasy?

we can all see who the saddo is


Again you fail to deal with the point and default to emotive language.

“Most venerable in society”

This guy had jobs. He did courses paid for the State which helped him get these jobs. He personally decided to do drugs and now the State have him in more courses and treatment.

What more exactly should society do? This man made a choice after the State helped him improve his attractiveness in the labour force.

That’s not inequality. He made personal choices and has personal demons.


Did you tell the women you were supposed to be “helping” during rape trials that you consider rape a joking matter and appear to not even consider it a crime?

Did you tell the Courts Service that you were making jokes about rape online?

These are serious questions and matters, art, unlike the utterly deranged, obsessive shit you write about me and which makes me genuinely worry about you as a person.


I’m not the one holding myself out as a virtue signaler. youre the one screamking rape apologist at everyone when the opportunity arises.

so yes, the question needs to be asked of you whether or not you told that poor girl about your weirdness, otherwise people might just start to see you for a hypocrite.

get help


OMG a rape joke :open_mouth:

One of many of course


Lolz. You demonise the vulnerable and talk about “class warfare” and “emotive language”.

Irony alert.

There are places where they cater for and indulge this social Darwinian nonsense. Renua for one. I believe there’s also a thing called the Hibernia forum which you might consider joining, where Ayn Rand fetishist blowhards write worthless nonsense that nobody reads.


Telling that a simpleton like you doesn’t understand the difference between kicking up and kicking down.

Then again, as a fat, useless doughnut-chomping Guard, you’ve made a career out of kicking down.


@The_Selfish_Giant will be seething at that trash piece about Fingal South East


Shrieking hypocrite. That is all.


You don’t have the intellect to even understand what hypocrisy is, as you’ve proved again here.

Keep shrieking at me, you vapid bellend.

You’re another constant source of unintended amusement.


Can you not deal with a simple point?

How exactly is he amongst the most vulnerable and what more do you suppose we do about it?

The Government provides virtually free third level. He didn’t take it- that’s a culture problem.

Regardless, the State paid for courses for him, which made him employable into good jobs.

He started to do drugs. His decision.

He lost his job. His fault.

The State are supporting him through his addiction and more courses.

Can we change our approach? Absolutely, but money isn’t always the answer and demonizing the State/Society is completely unreasonable given the various supports provided.

He made life choices, the State did not cause his situation.


How on earth are drug abusers not among society’s most vulnerable?

You’ve entered some sort of weird parallel universe here.


How is it society’s fault that he started doing drugs?

How is it inequality?


I’ll repeat the question.

I only repeat it given that it’s now clear you don’t consider drug abusers to be among society’s most vulnerable.

Which is the view of an Ayn Rand-worshipping nutcase.

The Government has a responsibility to try and protect people from the horrors of drug abuse.

Enlightened policy makers such as Aodhan O’Riordain can help in the direct area of how drug addiction itself is treated, the long term fix is education, support and not abandoning communities to failed social Darwinian bullshit like you’re peddling here, so that the likelihood of people falling into addiction is lessened.


Sorry but you’re talking crap.

You said the article is about inequality. That is clearly Kitty’s intention and what her followers like you gobble up.

But how is it?

The man had opportunity and supports from the State and used them. He was going through life fine. He just made a personal decision and went off the rails. Women playing croquet in Ballsbridge didn’t cause that.

Jonathan Corrie was from a relatively well off background. He fell into drugs. He sold two houses given to him by his family to support his habit.

It has nothing to do with inequality.


And still you peddle rot about drug addicts not being among society’s most vulnerable.

I’m beginning to think you must be pretty vulnerable yourself.

You’d have to be to be so gullible as to fall for such shite.


Why is this so difficult for you?

You stated this about the article;

How is it inequality?

You moved onto emotive language like “vulnerable” as you cannot form a basic argument about how this man’s story evidences inequality.

What I see is a man who got State supports in education.
Got employment because of that.
Made personal decisions that sent him down the wrong track.

This happens to people from all walks of life.