twiglet wrote:I don't know how folk know where the feminazis are from but a few of the posters reckon a number of them are from the south. If so, why are they so bothered about Paddy and where he plays?
A few years ago Ismaheel Akinade was one of three who raped a 14 year old girl a number of times. He was eventually found GUILTY but continued to play football for Waterford in the league of Ireland. The feminine network were nowhere to be seen. Why? Would it be because of his colour, or maybe his religion or maybe because Ismaheel was not a rugby player?
Significant differences between the cases. First of all, they were all underage (Akinade was 16 at the time). In the ROI, details of a case will not be published unless the victim agrees to it (to protect the identity of the victim). Akinade was convicted of sexual abuse but did show remorse, unlike PJ who came out with all guns blazing! He did get a suspended sentence (presumably because of his age and the time it took to get to court (4 years).
As far as I can recall, a Dundalk United footballer was suspended for tweeting support for the lads when the court case ended and a Laois Gaelic Footballer was dropped for a final when doing something similar on twitter (despite being the leading points scorer in the league).
twiglet wrote:I don't know how folk know where the feminazis are from but a few of the posters reckon a number of them are from the south. If so, why are they so bothered about Paddy and where he plays?
A few years ago Ismaheel Akinade was one of three who raped a 14 year old girl a number of times. He was eventually found GUILTY but continued to play football for Waterford in the league of Ireland. The feminine network were nowhere to be seen. Why? Would it be because of his colour, or maybe his religion or maybe because Ismaheel was not a rugby player?
Significant differences between the cases. First of all, they were all underage (Akinade was 16 at the time). In the ROI, details of a case will not be published unless the victim agrees to it (to protect the identity of the victim). Akinade was convicted of sexual abuse but did show remorse, unlike PJ who came out with all guns blazing! He did get a suspended sentence (presumably because of his age and the time it took to get to court (4 years).
As far as I can recall, a Dundalk United footballer was suspended for tweeting support for the lads when the court case ended and a Laois Gaelic Footballer was dropped for a final when doing something similar on twitter (despite being the leading points scorer in the league).
So Akinade is grand because he showed remorse for a sexual abuse conviction but somehow Paddy Jackson, convicted of NOTHING, gets your criticism.
TMHG wrote:
Significant differences between the cases. First of all, they were all underage (Akinade was 16 at the time). In the ROI, details of a case will not be published unless the victim agrees to it (to protect the identity of the victim). Akinade was convicted of sexual abuse but did show remorse, unlike PJ who came out with all guns blazing! He did get a suspended sentence (presumably because of his age and the time it took to get to court (4 years).
As far as I can recall, a Dundalk United footballer was suspended for tweeting support for the lads when the court case ended and a Laois Gaelic Footballer was dropped for a final when doing something similar on twitter (despite being the leading points scorer in the league).
The mind boggles.
Akinade = Convicted = Shows Remorse = Okay
Jackson = Not convicted = Shows no remorse = Not okay
So it's better to be guilty and show remorse than have committed no crime but not be remorseful for being acquitted
Good grief!
BRING OUR BOYS HOME #BOBH
THROWN UNDER THE BUS AND EXILED 14/04/18
twiglet wrote:I don't know how folk know where the feminazis are from but a few of the posters reckon a number of them are from the south. If so, why are they so bothered about Paddy and where he plays?
A few years ago Ismaheel Akinade was one of three who raped a 14 year old girl a number of times. He was eventually found GUILTY but continued to play football for Waterford in the league of Ireland. The feminine network were nowhere to be seen. Why? Would it be because of his colour, or maybe his religion or maybe because Ismaheel was not a rugby player?
Significant differences between the cases. First of all, they were all underage (Akinade was 16 at the time). In the ROI, details of a case will not be published unless the victim agrees to it (to protect the identity of the victim). Akinade was convicted of sexual abuse but did show remorse, unlike PJ who came out with all guns blazing! He did get a suspended sentence (presumably because of his age and the time it took to get to court (4 years).
As far as I can recall, a Dundalk United footballer was suspended for tweeting support for the lads when the court case ended and a Laois Gaelic Footballer was dropped for a final when doing something similar on twitter (despite being the leading points scorer in the league).
So Akinade is grand because he showed remorse for a sexual abuse conviction but somehow Paddy Jackson, convicted of NOTHING, gets your criticism.
This is mind bending logic.
No, Akinade isn't grand. But there is a difference in the cases and in PJ & Co. were adults. The reason presumably why the 'feminazis' were not jumping up and down about it is because all involved were children and the laws that apply in the ROI limits reporting of sexual assault cases and the public are excluded from attending the court cases.
TMHG wrote:
Significant differences between the cases. First of all, they were all underage (Akinade was 16 at the time). In the ROI, details of a case will not be published unless the victim agrees to it (to protect the identity of the victim). Akinade was convicted of sexual abuse but did show remorse, unlike PJ who came out with all guns blazing! He did get a suspended sentence (presumably because of his age and the time it took to get to court (4 years).
As far as I can recall, a Dundalk United footballer was suspended for tweeting support for the lads when the court case ended and a Laois Gaelic Footballer was dropped for a final when doing something similar on twitter (despite being the leading points scorer in the league).
The mind boggles.
Akinade = Convicted = Shows Remorse = Okay
Jackson = Not convicted = Shows no remorse = Not okay
So it's better to be guilty and show remorse than have committed no crime but not be remorseful for being acquitted
Good grief!
The problem is that they are just not role model material in their misogynistic attitude.
twiglet wrote:I don't know how folk know where the feminazis are from but a few of the posters reckon a number of them are from the south. If so, why are they so bothered about Paddy and where he plays?
A few years ago Ismaheel Akinade was one of three who raped a 14 year old girl a number of times. He was eventually found GUILTY but continued to play football for Waterford in the league of Ireland. The feminine network were nowhere to be seen. Why? Would it be because of his colour, or maybe his religion or maybe because Ismaheel was not a rugby player?
Significant differences between the cases. First of all, they were all underage (Akinade was 16 at the time). In the ROI, details of a case will not be published unless the victim agrees to it (to protect the identity of the victim). Akinade was convicted of sexual abuse but did show remorse, unlike PJ who came out with all guns blazing! He did get a suspended sentence (presumably because of his age and the time it took to get to court (4 years).
As far as I can recall, a Dundalk United footballer was suspended for tweeting support for the lads when the court case ended and a Laois Gaelic Footballer was dropped for a final when doing something similar on twitter (despite being the leading points scorer in the league).
So Akinade is grand because he showed remorse for a sexual abuse conviction but somehow Paddy Jackson, convicted of NOTHING, gets your criticism.
This is mind bending logic.
No, Akinade isn't grand. But there is a difference in the cases and in PJ & Co. were adults. The reason presumably why the 'feminazis' were not jumping up and down about it is because all involved were children and the laws that apply in the ROI limits reporting of sexual assault cases and the public are excluded from attending the court cases.
Yes but you are still defending one and criticising the other. The main difference between the two cases is that in one case there was a conviction. In the other case there was an acquittal. Just let that sink in...
TMHG wrote:
Significant differences between the cases. First of all, they were all underage (Akinade was 16 at the time). In the ROI, details of a case will not be published unless the victim agrees to it (to protect the identity of the victim). Akinade was convicted of sexual abuse but did show remorse, unlike PJ who came out with all guns blazing! He did get a suspended sentence (presumably because of his age and the time it took to get to court (4 years).
As far as I can recall, a Dundalk United footballer was suspended for tweeting support for the lads when the court case ended and a Laois Gaelic Footballer was dropped for a final when doing something similar on twitter (despite being the leading points scorer in the league).
The mind boggles.
Akinade = Convicted = Shows Remorse = Okay
Jackson = Not convicted = Shows no remorse = Not okay
So it's better to be guilty and show remorse than have committed no crime but not be remorseful for being acquitted
Good grief!
The problem is that they are just not role model material in their misogynistic attitude.
What misogynistic attitude? Apologise / show remorse for being acquitted?
Any misogynistic attitude shown, remorse has been quite clearly publicised.......
A role model for who? Kids? Where are their parents? That's who their role models should be. Parents relying on sports persons to set an example for their children are not fit to be parents in the first instance.
Last edited by UlsterNo9 on Sat May 11, 2019 3:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.
BRING OUR BOYS HOME #BOBH
THROWN UNDER THE BUS AND EXILED 14/04/18
TMHG wrote:
Significant differences between the cases. First of all, they were all underage (Akinade was 16 at the time). In the ROI, details of a case will not be published unless the victim agrees to it (to protect the identity of the victim). Akinade was convicted of sexual abuse but did show remorse, unlike PJ who came out with all guns blazing! He did get a suspended sentence (presumably because of his age and the time it took to get to court (4 years).
As far as I can recall, a Dundalk United footballer was suspended for tweeting support for the lads when the court case ended and a Laois Gaelic Footballer was dropped for a final when doing something similar on twitter (despite being the leading points scorer in the league).
The mind boggles.
Akinade = Convicted = Shows Remorse = Okay
Jackson = Not convicted = Shows no remorse = Not okay
So it's better to be guilty and show remorse than have committed no crime but not be remorseful for being acquitted
Good grief!
The problem is that they are just not role model material in their misogynistic attitude.
Who said sports stars needed to be role models anyway?
And what would be the point given that 99.5 % of us would have no chance of emulating them?
Most sports stars are poorly educated, perennial adolescents who have never done a real day’s work in their lives.
And that’s actually why we like/envy them.
Last edited by justinr73 on Sat May 11, 2019 3:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
twiglet wrote:I don't know how folk know where the feminazis are from but a few of the posters reckon a number of them are from the south. If so, why are they so bothered about Paddy and where he plays?
A few years ago Ismaheel Akinade was one of three who raped a 14 year old girl a number of times. He was eventually found GUILTY but continued to play football for Waterford in the league of Ireland. The feminine network were nowhere to be seen. Why? Would it be because of his colour, or maybe his religion or maybe because Ismaheel was not a rugby player?
Significant differences between the cases. First of all, they were all underage (Akinade was 16 at the time). In the ROI, details of a case will not be published unless the victim agrees to it (to protect the identity of the victim). Akinade was convicted of sexual abuse but did show remorse, unlike PJ who came out with all guns blazing! He did get a suspended sentence (presumably because of his age and the time it took to get to court (4 years).
As far as I can recall, a Dundalk United footballer was suspended for tweeting support for the lads when the court case ended and a Laois Gaelic Footballer was dropped for a final when doing something similar on twitter (despite being the leading points scorer in the league).
Sounds like standard RoI bullshit. How dare Paddy come out all guns blazing when found innocent, the cheek of him. He should have videoed the encounter and sent it to his mates.
