Legal Coffee Drinking

at

From top: 3rd Place Coffee Shop, Dundalk; managers Niall McGuinness and Alicja Kolodziejczyk with ‘Chilli’

‘sup?

This afternoon.

Niall McGuinness writes:

‘My partner Alicja I currently manage 3rd Place Coffee House in Dundalk.

The HSE has summonsed us to attend Dundalk District Court this Thursday 2nd December for failing to comply with a Compliance Notice served on 5th November. If the Compliance Order is granted the District Judge has the power to close our business down for 7 days.

Our customers health status is none of my business. Our café will never discriminate against our customers whatever the consequences. I intend to fight this all the way at the District Court and Higher Courts. It doesn’t matter how many politicians and journalist endorse it or how many businesses enforce it, it will still be discrimination. Wrong is wrong we all have a moral and ethical duty to stand up and do what is right.

We have set up a Go Fund Me to support our initial costs because in Ireland there are huge barriers to access to justice as there is no legal aid available for such test cases.’

3rd Place Coffee Legal Fundraiser (GoFundme)

Update: ‘Chilli’ plays no role in these proceedings. He offered to help on a pro-bone basis, but was declined, an insider says.

Pics: 3rd Place Coffe/Trip Advisor

Sponsored Link

171 thoughts on “Legal Coffee Drinking

    1. SOQ

      Why is there always some troll sitting waiting to spew poo? Its getting beyond predictable at this stage.

      Niall and Alicja are taking a stand for something they believe in, and are prepared to take it all the way- so good luck to them.

      That’s an old picture btw- 3rd Space have since moved down the street. They do a great vegan breakfast and are very supportive of local artists displaying their work in the space.

      1. anti morons

        MORONS LOOKING FOR CHEAP PUBLICITY THAT’S WHAT THEY ARE!!!

        HOPEFULLY THEY ARE FORCED TO CLOSE DOWN FOR A MONTH AND FINED!!

        MORONS LOOKING FOR CHEAP PUBLICITY

        I HOPE HE SPENT ALL THAT MONEY TO GO TO THE HIGH COURT

        MORONS LOOKING FOR CHEAP PUBLICITY

        AND I STAND FOR SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE, soq

      1. Kim Cardassian

        Well, is stupidity communicable? The jury is probably out on that one. :) I’ll stick with pandemic level viruses in the meantime

        1. K. Cavan

          No, Kim, the jury is not out on that, stupidity is not communicable but it certainly can be communicated. Now, this Pandemic you refer to, where is it? Was there a Pandemic in 2020 & if so, why are the CSO trying to hide all the deaths? I’m sure, on their website, you’ve seen the way they make 2020 look like an entirely typical, normal year for mortality in this country. Why are they doing that? Is it a conspiracy? Did they not carry the ten when they were totting up or are they just trying to make you look foolish?
          ”Pandemic level viruses” ah, non sequitars in aeternum…

      2. Rob_G

        @ Micko do you think that private businesses should pick and choose which legislation relating to health and safety they should follow?

        Maybe handwashing, or perhaps the provision of fire exits?

          1. Oro

            It’s not discriminatory so you should disagree in this case.

            Just because you feel like something is discrimination doesn’t mean that it is. It’s categorized very clearly (for good reason) and this doesn’t make it.

          2. Micko

            “It’s categorized very clearly ”

            Categorised eh? Oro.

            Well, it wasn’t that long ago that discrimination against Travellers was tickedy boo.

            Fill your boots was the mantra!

            And it wasn’t that long ago that discriminating against gay people was all the rage.

            Mad for it society was!

            So, by your logic EVERY SINGLE ONE of those minority groups who got discriminated against and beaten down, was hunky feckin dory coz it wasn’t written down on a piece of paper before then.

            Is that it?

          3. Nigel

            ‘Well, it wasn’t that long ago’

            Quite recent, you might even say, but obviously nothing compored to the travails of those who choose to be unvaccinated during a public health emergency.

          4. Micko

            “compored to the travails”

            A straight or a settled person probably though the same of gays or travellers back in the day.

            “Why can’t they just be and act like the rest of us!!!!” (Shake fist). ;P

          5. Nigel

            ‘Why are they whining about entirely self-imposed inconveniences and comparing them to genuine prejudices that ruin and distort blameless people’s lives as if they’re remotely similar?’

          6. Micko

            emmm

            They are not ” self-imposed inconveniences” they are mandated by government.

            It is a choice not to be vax’d, but the “inconveniences” are imposed upon us. And they’re soon to be financial in Greece for example.

            Just because YOU think it’s mild and you’re in the majority who’s happy to impose it on others – doesn’t mean it’s not wrong.

            And I’ve just provided you with two examples in recent history where the MAJORITY of society thought it was perfectly ok to crap on other people’s rights from a height!

            Like it’s doing again now.

            Now, take it away Ms Bassey

            “The word is about, there´s something evolving,
            whatever may come, the world keeps revolving…”

            TUUUUUUUUNE!

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzLT6_TQmq8

          7. Micko

            emmm- (2nd post)

            They are not ” self-imposed inconveniences” they are mandated by government.

            It is a choice not to be vax’d, but the “inconveniences” are imposed upon us.

            Just because YOU think it’s mild and you’re in the majority who’s happy to impose it on others – doesn’t mean it’s not wrong.

            And I’ve just provided you with two examples where the majority of society thought it was perfectly ok to crap on other people’s rights form a height!

            Like it’s doing again now.

            Now, take it away Ms Bassey TUUUUUUUUNE!

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzLT6_TQmq8

          8. Oro

            You’ve spelled out how it’s not discrimination in your own logic, yet you so clearly want to be able to claim discrimination (where none exists) that you fail to see it.

            A gay person cannot choose to be straight to remove the discrimination that they face in life. You however, can get a vaccine any time of your choosing (as long as there’s an appointment).

            Your vaccination status does not make up a significant part of your identity, therefore you are not discriminated against because of this choice. These inconveniences (and they are inconveniences) are a condition of your own choice. It is entirely under your own control.

          9. SOQ

            Don’t ya know Nigel is the expert in all things minority?

            He’s not gay but knows what’s best for the gays,
            He’s not Trans but knows what’s best for the Trans,
            He’ll probably have a go at telling the travellers what to do soon.

            Nigel says it is not the same and Nigel knows best- so there.

          10. Nigel

            ‘They are not ” self-imposed inconveniences” they are mandated by government.’

            It’s a public health emergency.

            ‘It is a choice not to be vax’d, but the “inconveniences” are imposed upon us.’

            Choosing not to get vaccinated during a public health emergency has consequences dictated by the form of that emergency, ie, a highly contagious airborne virus.

            ‘doesn’t mean it’s not wrong.’

            The justificarion is based on the fact that we are taking measures to deal with a pandemic. It is dirven entirely by pragmatism, not prejudice, and can only be effectively judged in those terms.

            ‘And I’ve just provided you with two examples where the majority of society thought it was perfectly ok to crap on other people’s rights form a height!’

            Both examples show how little you understand, or care, about what discrimination really means.

          11. benblack

            @Oro

            This is what I don’t understand:

            For decades, the LGBT community have campaigned to be included in society – legally and socially. Inclusivity was the objective – an objective they realised.

            However, once they received this acceptance, they, almost immediately, segregated themselves with labels like LGBT. I thought the purpose was to recognise the person and not their sexual preferences – that their sexual orientation was secondary to their primary aim which was to be recogisnised as equal to heteorsexual people and an integrated part of society as human beings first.

            Human beings first, sexual orientation second. However, the reality is the inverse.

          12. Oro

            Just in case you were wondering J, these are the kinda comments Rob was referring to yday.

            Also, for someone who refers to their identity as a mother on an, oh I don’t know, twice hourly basis, and uses that as a motivator for their opinions, it seems like a weird position to take to make fun of people that organize some of their beliefs via parts of their identity.

            I’m not judging your use of your having a child btw just acknowledging it.

          13. Nigel

            They campaigned to have their identity recognised and protected from prejudice – why should they abandon the identity they worked so hard for? How do you divide a person from their identity? Why would you demand that anyone should do that?

          14. benblack

            Because a person – a real person – is much more than their sexual identity.

            That was the argument campaigners for decades pursued and correctly won.

            Present day interpretations where a small portion of a person, their sexual identity, is more important than the whole person would be of great disappointment to early campaigners for equal rights for the discriminated.

            The BLM movement has the same problem – the colour of your skin and racial differences do not define the person.

          15. Micko

            “A gay person cannot choose to be straight to remove the discrimination that they face in life”

            Yes Oro, agreed in principle. But some gay people have been forced to hide their feelings – as we’ve discussed before. So they CAN be compelled, either by society or shame in the past and present – which of course is wrong.

            Just as I cannot choose to feel any different about THIS the way I do. And I am compelled to do what I feel is right for me and my family.

            Be it by my upbringing or my genetic tendencies.

            The chemicals and neurons that make up your brain and give you your feelings of attraction to the same sex, are no different to the chemicals and neurons that make up my brain that make me feel that this entire situation is wrong and evil.

            Neither of us can change our brain chemistry, be it nature or nuture – your brain chemistry does not trump mine.

            “Son… Have you TRIED not being an unvaccinated?” ;)

          16. Oro

            The comparison doesn’t work. Gay people when forced by society not to be able to be open about their identity, are not straight, they are still gay, just closeted. We don’t need to get into the complexities of the politics of this, it’s not for this discussion, but just to say that direct comparison doesn’t work. And you’re pigeon-holing the history of something that frankly has nothing to do with you into a different meaning just to suit your own circumstances, it’s very cynical.

          17. Nigel

            ‘are no different to the chemicals and neurons that make up my brain that make me feel that this entire situation is wrong and evil.’

            That’s called an opinon, not an intrinsic identity

            ‘ “Son… Have you TRIED not being an unvaccinated?”’

            Literally just get a vaccine.

          18. Nigel

            ‘Present day interpretations where a small portion of a person, their sexual identity, is more important’

            Don’t you think it’s quite astonishingly arrogant and ignorant to tell other people what parts of themselves are, or should be, less important to them?

            ‘The BLM movement has the same problem – the colour of your skin and racial differences do not define the person.’

            Except it does. In all sorts of ways. Especially in the US. Pretty much the entire history of the US is built on the colour of skin defining people. You just want people to ignore it.

          19. Micko

            “That’s called an opinon, not an intrinsic identity”

            Explain to me how it’s different?

            You’re fine for me to self identify as whatever gender I like when I feel that way -so “intrinsic identity” is not a fixed state is it?

            But if I say “I feel a compulsion” to stand up against something I feel is wrong.

            And If I did get a vaccine – how would that make me feel about myself. Would you be happy that I conformed to be like you?

            How is it any different?

            It’s all just chemistry.

          20. benblack

            If your whole life is centred on your sexual identity and orientation, then, I pity you.

            It’s like obsessing over red hair or freckles – a persecuted minority.

            There’s more to life than sex and having sex – it has, like everything else, its time and its place.

            All lives matter.

          21. Nigel

            ‘Explain to me how it’s different?’

            If facts are presented that show you that the vaccinations are not evil, you will change your opinion. Centuries of belief that being gay was evil never stopped a single person from being gay.

            ‘You’re fine for me to self identify as whatever gender I like when I feel that way,’

            I do. Presumably you are doing that right now and I am fine with it, for what that’s worth.

            ‘but if I say “I feel a compulsion” to stand up against something I feel is wrong.’

            Literally an opinion, however strongly held. And wrong.

            (If your health decisions really are governed by compulsions rather than personal needs, knowledge, experience and the advice of medical experts, then I would start doing something about those compulsions, they sound detrimental.)

            ‘It’s all just chemistry.’

            You have no agency over your sexual, or gender, identity, which you were born with. You have agency over your opinions. You were not born with the opinion that covid vaccines are evil.

          22. Micko

            “the entire history of the US is built on the colour of skin defining people. You just want people to ignore it.”

            Jesus Chist… have to repeat that…

            “You just want people to ignore it”

            YEEEESSSS You numpty – of COURSE we want people to ignore each others skin colour.

            It’s literally the fecking definition of NOT being a racist

            For F’s sake

          23. Nigel

            ‘If your whole life is centred on your sexual identity and orientation, then, I pity you.’

            Nobody cares.

            ‘It’s like obsessing over red hair or freckles – a persecuted minority.’

            People should be proud of their red hairs and their freckles – it’s good for self-esteem and defies persecutors.

            ‘There’s more to life than sex and having sex – it has, like everything else, its time and its place.’

            I’m not sure what ‘there’s a time and place for being gay’ implies about your attitudes, but it ain’t good.

          24. Nigel

            ‘YEEEESSSS You numpty – of COURSE we want people to ignore each other skin colour.’

            Why? Is there something wrong with skin colour? Is there something wrong with it? Is it shameful? Embarrassing? What?

            ‘It’s literally the fecking definition of NOT being a racist dick’

            It really, really isn’t.

          25. Nigel

            ‘All lives matter.’

            If you really thought that it would be inclusive of Black Lives Matter, not in opposition to it.

          26. benblack

            You’re just being deliberately obtuse.

            Welcome back, anyway – look forward to reading some of your more witty and humourous replies to others in the future – but, for now, good night and God bless.

          27. Micko

            “You have no agency over your sexual, or gender, identity, which you were born with”

            Actually, scientists don’t really understand how much of someones sexuality is nature vs nurture, there certainly are genetic components, but nature has a lot to play.

            For example, you weren’t born with a certain ‘kink’ for say women in sexy lingerie, you acquired it through some past experience.

            But I digress…

            “identity, which you were born with”

            Then how can people change their gender? How can someone feel one way as a child, another as a teen and another way as an adult? You said it was “intrinsic” How can that be?

            It is chemistry. An ever changing ballet of the mind.

            Just like my brain chemistry – I FEEL a certain way and Oro’s brain too… even yours’.

          28. Janet, dreams of an alternate universe

            Did you know long distance running rewrites the paths of your brain chemistry ? ( for the better )

          29. Nigel

            ‘Actually, scientists don’t really understand how much of someones sexuality is nature vs nurture, there certainly are genetic components, but nature has a lot to play. ‘

            You still don’t have much conscious agency over it, as you do over your decision to not get vaccinated. If you want to compare your conviction that the vaccines are evil to a kink, go ahead, I won’t kinkshame, but nobody ever said kinks were rational or consciously formed.

            ‘I FEEL a certain way and’

            May I suggest you try THINKING.

          30. Janet, dreams of an alternate universe

            Is it wrong but I enjoyed that exchange,
            I miss watching my fav characters in the bars I ran arguing the toss sometimes.
            Maybe that’s why I like it on here, although I did get to throw the really annoying ones out.

          31. Micko

            Woh woh there horsey boy Nigel…

            I never said the “vaccines were evil”

            The vaccines are great – for certain people. They save lives

            I said the move to EXCLUDE people from society based on their medical status was EVIL.

            And also,
            mandating them (Germany, Austria)
            and fining old people to get them (Greece)
            and ignoring the side effects
            and silencing doctors
            and firing doctors or people who disagree
            and giving them to kids who don’t need them
            and sneaking in a digital ID system
            and putting masks on kids little faces
            and world governments using it as a excuse to bring in China like policies
            and spending 23 billion in Ireland alone (on what?)
            and rounding people up in camps (Oz allegedly )
            and mandatory quarantine
            and police brutality
            and police bullying people who think differently

            and loads more crap.

            It’s not the vaccines and the science I have an issue with – it’s the evil politics and division that it’s created.

            And yeah, I can’t go along with that

            I have no choice…

          32. Nigel

            ‘Did you know long distance running rewrites the paths of your brain chemistry ?’

            I know it rewrites the paths of my ligaments and muscles. For years i kept trying to run and ended up doing myself awful injuries. Now I walk and cycle, hopefully to similar effect. Brain chemistry wise, I mean, God save my poor legs.

          33. Nigel

            ‘I said the move to EXCLUDE people from society based on the medical status was EVIL.’

            It’s one of a number of measures, all of which effect various people to different degrees, to cope with a public health crisis. I can’t see how it qualifies as evil.

            ‘And yeah, I can’t go along with that’

            Which is a conscious choice you made based on an opinion you have formed and which is not intrinsic part of your identity shaped through genetics/chemistry/nature/nurture in your formative years or based on any accident of birth or facet of your physical appearance.

          34. K. Cavan

            Sorry, Micko, Oro has judged discrimination to be non-discriminatory & since he’s not the one being discriminated against, well, need I spell it out? After all, if you’re White, you’d probably believe Apartheid was not discriminatory at all. White and an idiot, of course!
            Multi-tasking, impressive, this guy has two guns, one for each foot.
            Anyway, it’s all been categorised (for good reason), QED.

          35. K. Cavan

            Calm down Nigel, there is no public health emergency.
            Check out the CSO website, it’s all there in black and white, plus about 40 shades of green. You’ll feel much better if you do & it has the added advantage of preventing you from talking through your hat or wherever.
            So, it’s perfectly ok for people to choose not to have the experimental injections & if they exercise the right to bodily autonomy they are still probably, like me, very much vaccinated, they merely opted out of the ”gene & cell therapy” due to it’s tendency to be toxic & not work very well. I’m actually more vaccinated than you as I got the three-in-one twice but I won’t hold that against you.

    1. K. Cavan

      ”Fighting for the erosion of Health Rights” is it now? Health Rights? Who told you to use that phrase, Kim? Or did you invent it, all on your own? What exactly or even inexactly are Health Rights? Maybe you haven’t worked that out yet? Let me know.
      Health Rights, now I’ve heard it all.
      Bejaysus.

  1. pc plod

    “Our café will never discriminate against our customers whatever the consequences”

    Hi – I’m a peadophile, can I come in… ?

    1. tom2

      Make sure to visit without a mask if you have an active covid infection. They will be sure to serve you some coffee and cakes.

      1. K. Cavan

        You see Tom2, Covid is a form of Pneumonia, if you had Covid, from a Sars02 infection, it’s not cafes you’d be visiting & anyway, how exactly do you think paper masks can protect you from a virus? Do they catch the virions like a spider’s web, then they drift down harmlessly to rest, inert, on your chin? Do they travel upwards, deflected by the paper, into your hair, where the unrinsed remnants of Head & Shoulders for Greasy Hair does for them? If you’re a heart surgeon who doesn’t want to dribble saliva into someone’s chest cavity, masks are great, they’ll even catch most of the saliva but virions can fit 600 at a time, through the gaps between the weave in masks. You can stick your mask up your ass or put it on your face, the effect will be about the same in preventing transmission of a virus, none.

    2. K. Cavan

      Elo, ello, ello, pc plod, this looks suspiciously like the wispiest Strawman, so far, although the number of them lying around the premises at the moment makes it look like all these lower-case account names might lead back to the same IP Address.
      Shirley there can’t be that many people eager to join the debate here despite their inability to debate, each falling at the first hurdle by using as many Logical Fallacies as possible?

  2. gallantman

    It’s great that somebody has taken this stand. In any functioning democracy its the dissenting voices that allow the legal system needs to put necessary checks and balances on government power. The State will now have an opportunity to set out the scientific rationale and public health justification for the Covid pass. They can put forward proofs that the restrictions have a real tangible impact on peoples safety and the manner in which they have been implemented are necessary and proportionate. All of this can be fully cross examined in a public forum and we’ll all be better informed at the end of it.

  3. Sailor Gerry

    Fair play to them for taking a principled stand, and I will chip in the price of a couple of pints towards a worthy cause.
    Peoples medical status has always been a private matter and should remain so.

    For those that have any compassion in life, it might be worth watching the video below, to find out how many babies were tortured to death to provide the stem cells the “vaccine” manufacturers use.

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/o5DEkonreWOa/

  4. Jdawgs

    Is that a puppy in her arms held right beside the coffee grinder and countertop. Seriously silly people and I’m judging them just from the pictures not their moronic stance.

    1. SOQ

      Well you don’t just support Vaccine Passports but from from your previous comments, positively relish the idea of such discrimination- so no surprise you’d be trying to smear.

          1. K. Cavan

            Yes, it’s hilarious, Dolly and her comrades do actually think they’re ”On The Left”, while sharing their views with every fascist Corporate entity, every media conglomerate & every pharma manufacturer on the planet, not to mention Fine Gael & Fianna Fail, while promoting the soi disant political views of psychopathic billionaires who make their fortunes shorting currencies, destroying economies & putting people out of work. Walter Mitty’s got nothing on middle-class wokies.
            Is the other one out of hospital yet?

  5. Nigel

    Going into the (oh God) third year of a public health emergency and acting like you’ve never heard if it or don’t believe in it or aren’t affected by it just to appeal to a loud minority who also don’t believe in it doesn’t seem like the best use of anyione’s time or energy. Not complying with public health measures during a pubic health emergency is indeed a moral stand, though not the one they cliam. People say pandemic-truther disnformation isn’t dangerous or damaging, and here it is, threatening their livelihood. Or maybe it’s a Gofundme scam ad the real victims are the people who pay them. Don’t know which would be worse. It’s all bad and sad.

      1. Nigel

        But you don’t believe in any public health measures, at all, you don’t really believe there’s a pandemic, you don’t really believe in the vaccines and you don’t believe in empirical let alone theoretical reasons for implementing them because they contradict those beliefs, so why would giving you theoretical or imperical reasons be worth anyone’s time or energy?

          1. Nigel

            The disease is highly contaguous and airborne, the system excludes unvaccinated people from public indoor areas, seems highly logical and empirical to me.

          2. Nigel

            You want me to keep rephrasing it until I come up with a version you’re safely capable of understanding, or of arguing with? Or both?

        1. Nilbert

          This is really the only reply you can logically make here these days Nigel. But it will fall on deaf ears.
          You’re dealing with people who are speaking from a highly emotional and defensive perspective, about their beliefs.
          They constantly ask ‘questions’ which are really ungrounded statements. They constantly look for empirical backup when someone responds to their unfounded speculations.

        2. f_lawless

          I believe in public health measures. I also believe in cost-benefit analyses to back them up. If you’re not appalled and outraged that these have never been commissioned, then you’re not thinking clearly. This is not a valid public health policy approach

          1. Nigel

            Wow, a deadly pandemic! Better do a cost/benefit analasis to see if we should bother to do anything about it! Thank God we’re not THAT hypercapitalist.

          2. f_lawless

            Well done Nigel, slow hand clap another strawman.

            Let me correct myself on the terminology – technically what I should have said was ‘cost-effectiveness analyses’.

            As per the CDC’s website:
            https://www.cdc.gov/policy/polaris/economics/cost-effectiveness/index.html

            “Cost-effectiveness analysis is a way to examine both the costs and health outcomes of one or more interventions. It compares an intervention to another intervention (or the status quo) by estimating how much it costs to gain a unit of a health outcome, like a life year gained or a death prevented.”

            Why, over the course of the last 22 months or so, have no cost-effectiveness analyses been done to provide a justification for the continued use of the Covid public health interventions? The elephant in the room is that they’re evidently not having a net positive effect, but the government and NPHET have gone too far down the line to turn around and admit to the disaster they’ve inflicted upon Irish society.

            What’s becoming more glaringly obvious by the day, is that the restrictive measures are being used as a tool to induce continued public compliance as we get led step by step into a ‘new (totalitarian) normal’.

        1. Nigel

          I was, because I didn’t think they’re worth it, then the current wave took off and it seems like common sense to keep them up to protect the unvaccinated eejits who think they’re invulnerable.

          (Unvaccinated people who are not eejits know they’re vulnerable, so the description does not apply to them.)

          1. Micko

            So… we should keep the vax passport because they are a good tool to protect us during the current wave, yet they failed to protect AGAINST the current wave?

            How exactly are they useful again?

            They protect the unvaccinated right?

            Yet, the unvaccinated already make up 50% of those in hospital yet only 10% of the populations (as we’re told ad nausem)…

            So… how exactly are they useful again?

          2. Nigel

            Because it’s a highly contagious airborne disease therefore excluding unvaccinated people from public indoor ares seems logical, just as it may end up being logical to exclude everyone from public indoor places (touch wood.) Perhaps if we understood more about how and where so many unvaccinated people are contracting the disease we might be able to take more measures directed at them, but of course, that might be discrimination. Mind you, if I was unvaccinated, I’d want to know.

          3. SOQ

            @ Micko- it doesn’t matter how many times the narrative twists and turns they will always keep singing of the latest hymn sheet.

            I’ve worked with enough comms people in my time to spot them a mile off.

          4. Nigel

            ‘keep singing of the latest hymn sheet.’

            You’re accusing people you disagree with of unfairly and maliciously keeping up to date with current events and using them to form their opinons and referring to them in their comments in a way that suggests the situation is not utterly fixed and unchanging, they way you think it ought to be.

          5. SOQ

            Nope I am accusing certain individuals of being here and other sites to push a certain narrative. This is not a ‘conspiracy’- it is a documented fact- Kinzen being a case in point, although not the only one.

    1. John Smith

      @Nigel
      ‘Not complying with public health measures during a pubic health emergency is indeed a moral stand…’

      If the public health measures unfairly discriminate, as these do, then non-compliance is a moral duty – and that doesn’t even involve a consideration of whether the measures actually do what it says on the tin.

      1. Nigel

        By definition a public health measure that limits the public indoor activities of the unvaccinated during a public health crisis involving a highly contagious airborne disease is not ‘unfair discrimination.’

        1. benblack

          A disease with a recovery rate of 99.7% where the ‘vaccinated’ are also capable of transmitting the disease and are not protected from infection themselves.

          I didn’t even want to write that – it’s getting so boring now.

          So, yes, it is unfair discrimination.

          And, an unvaccinated person may have had the virus already – without their knowledge – and obtained natural immunity which is more effective than any so called ‘vaccine’.

          It’s just so tiresome.

          1. Nigel

            5.2 million dead worldwide so far and that’s not counting the cost of survivors suffering long-term effects. It’s a sensible precaution.

          2. benblack

            From, or with… underlying health conditions…shot dead but tested postive…little or no excess deaths during a pandemic…

            Not to mention the totalitarianism that is accepted as the ‘new normal’ – forced inoculations…the WEF…manipulation of data to exaggerate the reality…ubiquitous fear porn…etc.

            As I said, tiresome.

          3. Nigel

            It’s a pandemic with more than 5.2 million victims and counting, but you find it ‘tiresome.’ Nicely understatred.

          4. Nigel

            No, I get it, you dont believe in the reality of the pandemic, and 5.2 million dead people and who knows how many left with long-term health conditions or disabilities are going to persuade you otherwise.

          5. benblack

            I was thinking about what’s in it for you, Nigel?

            And, in part, going along with the pandemic narrative is a form of Wokeism and an understanding of where all this is heading – because, you’re not a stupid guy – and you’d have to be stupid to believe the illogical nonsense that this Covid narrative presents.

          6. Nigel

            Exactly the same as what’s in it for you – the fun of arguing on the internet. High-calorie, low-nutrient fast food for the brain.

            If this use of ‘wokeism’ denotes an acceptance of reality, then, okay, though the incredible versatility of the word is becoming, well, unreal.

            In the short term nobody knows where this is going because nobody knows what the oandemic is going to do next. If you’re worried about techbro dystopianism, well, they were up to that before the pandemic and pretending the pandemic isn’t real isn’t going to stop them any more than it’ll make the pandemic itself go away.

            In the medium term, this is going to blend into the climate change crisis, which, once again, pretending it can’t be happening won’t make it go away.

          7. benblack

            Arguing on the internet is not what I would consider fun – witty replies and humourous observations – now, that is fun. So, we’re not in it for the same things.

            Not to make the connection between your own personal Wokeisms and determination to legitimise such ‘realities’ with the pseudo-reality of the pandemic is disingenuous.

            The Wokeism future is based on unreal, unnatural, and illogical foundations, of which you are a vocal proponent, and the pandemic, and its effect on society, is the steel in that foundation.

          8. Nigel

            Aw, are you not having fun?

            The pandemic is real, so that puts ‘wokeism’ ahead, I guess. Try the Metaverse, which will allow you to construct your own reality to suit yourself.

          9. benblack

            Is that really all you can muster – a link to a stupid article from an even more ridiculous and stupid website?

            A least this is a respectable satirical website.

      2. NobleLocks

        Unfairly discrinimate (oh the humanity!)
        Moral duty – oh dear god
        Consideration of if it does bla blah blah…

        Obscurantism is not an argument
        Contrary arseholeism is not an argument
        Adoption of faux victim status is just ugly
        And then you talk about your moral duty while being happy to endanger the lives of those around you for your own pathetic wants

        These and many more like them are the reasons why the vast majority of the public in Ireland perceive anti-vaxxers are gargantuan D*ix. More concerned about their own precious wants than the health of the people around them. Willing to risk the lives of everyone else as long as they can be seen to be right. Your virtue seeking narcissicm is, quite frankly, disgusting.

        If ever there was any more proof needed of how close the extreme left and right truly are, its how all of you religious halfwits have adopted DARVO

        Deny
        Attack
        Reverse Victim and Offender

        If you are an anti vaxxer who thinks its ok to endanger others for your wants, YOU are the offender. The rest of all of this is just bull.

        1. SOQ

          Now you have your huffy rant over- what empirical evidence do you have that Vaccine Passports reduce the spread?

  6. Optimus Grime

    So from the GoFundMe opener I am to understand that the dog pictured above is also a manager of the establishment! I can’t wait to see him on the stand in court!

          1. Daisy Chainsaw

            Dunno. Someone Googoo is obsessed with since I linked to one article several months back. Can’t get enough of his Brucey, can Giggsy

          2. GiggidyGoo

            Did you not get your brucey bonus Daydee? Like most of your links, you didn’t read the article and made a show of yourself.
            As for Tom J. Which quacks have I quoted?

      1. benblack

        No, she means that – in a perfect world – the law would be balanced and just, but because of politically appointed judges, the scales are tipped in favour of the state and the prevailing political agenda.

        Dishonest scales.

        1. SOQ

          Maybe so but the court of public opinion can also be swayed by such actions and sometimes, that is more important. Either way, €9,200 in 20 hours shows there is support.

          I am waiting for the usual clowns to start with their ‘far right’ slurs- go on, I dare you.

          1. benblack

            Well, that’s the world we now inhabit, SOQ. Populist opinions, however ill-informed, are taken as gospel and dictate public policy – that is mob rule by definition.

            The judiciary is supposed to protect democracies from such aberations. Failing that, a free and objective press.

            We have neither.

            Hence, we are where we are.

  7. K. Cavan

    Have to say, the Covidians are clearly struggling to keep the faith. The victim-blaming is seriously Out There, they must be losing their weak grip on reality at this stage, the toys will be coming out of the prams any day now & they’ll need the support of the rest of us when they realise how gullible they’ve been & how many deaths & how much destruction & misery they’ve facilitated through their gormless support for Healthcare Fascism
    OMICRON, OMICRON, OMICRON, OMICRON, OMICRON.
    Is that the cavalry I hear or is it the most ludicrous, most laughable one yet. Apparently, according to the South African doctor who ”discovered” it, the symptoms are that you are very tired for two to three days.

  8. SOQ

    Apologies I was calling it space instead of place- no idea where that came from.

    €14,122 and still going. From what I can see, no national paper has covered this so- fair play to Broadsheet.

  9. Sailor Gerry

    I watched the video below last night and feel the discussion ties in pretty well with this thread.

    There has to be a reasonable accommodation to those that for whatever reason do not want to be part of the experiment. To go the way of Austria with massive fines and jail time for 25% of the population that will not submit to medical tyranny is a counter productive folly.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_uAwsVn10Y

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link