67 year old, taunted on video, falls over and is sat on

But good ole Slugger O’Toole take the word of the makers of the heavily edited video of Prionsias de Rossa getting assaulted and decide that he’s a liar, it wasn’t an assault or an attack. Stupid old codger is just old. Oh no, they added a question mark, that’s ok then. Assholes? How very Ron Burgundy.

Prionsias de Rossa is by definition an old man. Whatever his build, (which apparently is crucial for the understanding of what happened) it is ignorant to taunt anyone, let alone a pensioner and if he tripped or was pushed it is a fact that when he fell they didn’t help him up but instead they fucking sat on him and taunted him further. It was an anti-Lisboner too who called the cops over this shameful incident. This of course is left out of the video but many witnesses were there to see it happen. If this was done to any of my grandparents or relations or neighbours I’d go mental.

With the lack of murderers blowing people up in the North, Slugger O’Toole obviously needs to reposition itself but it’s a shame they’ve decided to get all gutterpress about it with the way they presented this to their readership. The Cedars have gone and actually researched who these people are. That’s good blogging but then it is the Cedars, the best political and cultural bloggers we have in Ireland.

Jazz covers this too.

22 Responses to “67 year old, taunted on video, falls over and is sat on”

  1. Caoimhin says:

    Sounds like you were there Damien, none of the accusations are alledged? they happened as you say as a matter of fact? Cool! Did the pensioner MEP answer the question as to why he voted to ignore Ireland’s outcome on the Lisbon referendum as proposed on Corbett’s amendment?

  2. […] Good additional stuff on the We Are Change Ireland crowd here: We are change who are you – link via Mulley. Digg this […]

  3. “With the lack of murderers blowing people up in the North” – Now, now, remember that those kids in Omagh were evil oppressors. Or something. Never did figure out how they justified that one to themselves…

    On the de Rossa incident, absolutely horrifying, and not a good sign for free speech in this country.

  4. (Interestingly enough, both the NI murderers and the alleged ‘We are Change Ireland’ thugs seem to have heavy backing in the US)

  5. roosta says:

    Did the pensioner MEP answer the question as to why he voted to ignore Ireland’s outcome on the Lisbon referendum as proposed on Corbett’s amendment?

    Does he have to? Out on the street?

  6. Of course. Otherwise he’ll get assaulted, you see. Ireland, doing democracy the ____ way. (Oops, nearly invoked Godwin.)

  7. Caoimhin says:

    No roosta he does not. But since Damien seems to have inside information I was curious, aren’t you?

  8. squid says:

    I would question the neutrality of the video’s source. The wise up journal aren’t exactly unbiased in all of this.

  9. squid says:

    by the way, when did slugger o toole start making the details of the e-mail field on their form open to the public.

    if you mouseover someones name in the comments their email address appears in the status bar of firefox at the bottom left.

  10. Paul says:

    Did the pensioner MEP answer the question as to why he voted to ignore Ireland’s outcome on the Lisbon referendum as proposed on Corbett’s amendment?

    Perhaps because it was a stunt amendment? The EU has no choice but to accept Ireland’s ratification or otherwise of the Treaty.

  11. WorldbyStorm says:

    Caomhin, in any other context, as Damien points out, it would be reprehensible to hassle someone in their late 60s on the street and wind up sitting on them (which isn’t alleged, it’s on the video for the first part and they admit to sitting on him). Any other context… It’s that simple. And I’m no fan of De Rossa on a political level.

    As regards the amendment, to be honest that’s just so much fluff, and De Rossa had already answered the question in other venues. Problem is that the solipsistic conspiracy theorists down WAC way don’t actually listen to any other voices than their own (bar of course Gerry Adams who handled them with consummate ease, as seen on a further video on their site. But then ‘accosting’ Adams inside the SF offices by sidling up to him, scratching side of face as question is put, then backing away as security men cluster in is telling in its own way…).

    Damien… ‘cultural’? 🙂 If I were you I’d reserve judgement ’til you see the Electronic Body Music post I’m carefully crafting in my spare time… 🙂

  12. Caoimhín: That has to be a candidate for the Non-Sequitur of the Year Awards.

    Did the pensioner MEP answer the question …?

    He was on his fucking back on the ground with spotty gobshites sitting on him. If somebody did that to a relative of mine I wouldn’t be answerable for my actions.

    Though I might well have my own reservations about the Lisbon treaty, the arrogance of your question leaves me speechless and inclines me to vote Yes.

  13. Emmet Ryan says:

    Gotta go with Bock on this one. My parents are a little older than De Rossa and I would go ape if someone even contemplated pulling this kind of a stunt on them.

    They sat on him for crying out loud. They admit to sitting on him. You don’t just go and sit on people. How can anyone justify sitting on someone because they won’t answer a bloody question. I can’t imagine Paxman trying that one on Michael Howard.

  14. Sitting on someone without their consent is surely some form of assault, no?

  15. Of course it is, but it’s also gurrier behaviour. The people who did this have no credibility, and neither does that character who tried to justify it. What’s his name? Caoimhín.

    As he said on his own site, When fear of losing the debate over-rides the concept of the original plan to have an open exchange of thoughts or ideas with others, isn’t it amazing how personalities, backgrounds, or beliefs creep in?

    Indeed it is, Caoimhín. Amazing.

    Indeed it is.

  16. Mick says:

    Thanks for the link Damien!

    What struck me at the time was the obvious disparity with the Irish Times report that said he was allegedly attacked outside Liberty Hall. The video indicates (though doesn’t prove) that he fell over inside the building. That’s the reason I thought it worth blogging.

    I added the question mark to the title (shortly after) to beef up my original caveat about the editing and the dark in the text of the blog. The nearest thing to a conclusion I ventured was that the disparity was embarrassing.

    As my colleague on the Telegraph Shane Richmond has said, http://url.ie/aal:

    “The internet removes the time barrier. Without it, we never stop, and still we’re never completely right. But everything can be changed. Publish what you know now; learn more, add more. It’s never finished and it’s never completely right.”

    Now it seems that you’ve hit upon new information which has arisen (I linked to CL’s piece, again very shortly after the original piece went up), ie that he was then sat upon by his interrogators: although a link or a source would be handy to take this further.

    I’ll update Slugger with a link to this thread.

  17. Mick says:


    Have you got a link to the admission? I’m afraid I can’t see the sitting on him.

  18. Mark McGregor says:

    This blog is bang on. I’ve known Mick for years and can honestly say he is an evil pensioner hating bastard. The only thing that gives him more pleasure than seeing old people in pain is laughing at injured babies, especially now as you point out his joy in reporting bombs and death in the north has been removed.

    In no way was he trying to show both the MSM story and the online content and get to the truth. He is a hater of the aged and his blog has revealed his deep, dark, sick soul.

    Well done Mulley, without you we would never have known that by linking all the content it would so clearly demonstrate Fealty’s hate of pensioners that was only cloaked by his now unachievable blood lust for reporting the north’s conflict.

    (seriously what a load of crap)

  19. Caoimhin says:

    What arrogance? The adjective pensioner was used in the description of Mr. DeRossa in the original post. What Damien posted here was news to me, I simply asked some questions. You choose to quote me back to myself but I fear your behaviour proves my exact point.

  20. I don’t care what you called him. We’re talking about a man no longer young, lying on the ground in considerable distress,and you want to know if he answered a question. If I’m misinterpreting you in this, please forgive me.

  21. barry says:

    At the end of all this I am delighted with the general trend of the comments. As an ‘older’ person myself I get pissed off when we are considered as past it, even if we are. I know it is irritating when oldies start lecturing younger people – most younger people are polite enough to listen and then ignore…..

    In this case the ‘victim’ is a pol, so he knows that his views won’t please everyone, thats the risk he takes all the time. No reason to hassle him though, no matter who he is. I don’t think, from what I’ve heard/seen that he was actually assaulted, he fell and then he was assaulted, perhaps. Either way, no way to treat another person, regardless of their age.

    Bye, Barry

  22. Barry: The point is that if it becomes dangerous to hold an unpopular political view, that would erode democracy in this country.