Who’s Been Cancelled??

[Lar Naparka]

Lar best wishes on the health front.

Thanks Ross. I appreciate all the sympathy I can get nowadays.
With regard to the subject in hand, I'd like to move on to hopefully better things.
I have no strong feelings, one way or the other, about Angus Mac Grianna, Waterford Whispers or the tenets of the Holy Rooman Catholc Church.
Live and let live could be my motto.
My main gripe is that no advance warning appears to have been given that the sketch contained material that might be offensive to some and that viewer discretion was advised.
I accept this it is parents' responsibility to oversee what their children should be allowed to watch but, AFAIK, no such advance notice was given. Had this been done, I doubt that I would have spent the last few days trying to play handball against a haystack.

[Lar Naparka]

Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?

I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.

Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn't!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can't tell you ass from your elbow.

The fact that I don't necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it's only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don't give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
"It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence"
Sez who?
Here's a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I've been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who'd agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You're a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)

You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line

sid you are getting worse!
If you bother to read what I wrote, you may realise that I called you nothing of the sort.
The sketch was broadcast at a time when young an old were tuned in to watch new year's festivities, which  was mentioned by a considerable number of those who formally complained.
Your modus operandi seems to to make sweeping decorations that do not allow for any counter opinion. There is seldom any attempt to justify what you are handing down to he rest of us poor mortals.
Tell you what sid- if you can get anyone to put it in writing that your line of reasoning makes perfect sense, I will admit that I am beaten and I will rest my case,

I've consistently debated and rebutted counter opinion! That's what debate is supposed to be!

The only reasonable argument I can see from the counter side is that there should have been a warning on the segment - I didn't watch the programme live, maybe there was?

As for the actual sketch itself, neither you nor anybody else has come up with a single argument as to why it should have been apologised for

The only argument I can see against the sketch is the blasphemy one, which would be ludicrous, we're not living in JC McQuaid's Ireland anymore

Best wishes with your health problems

Sincere thanks for your good wishes, sid.
However, life is too short to waste any more of it going over the same ground again and again.
Don't forget that if you can get even one half sane individual who is willing to swear that he understand what you are on about,  I wikll admit defeat gracefully.

[restorepride]

Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?

I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.

Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn't!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can't tell you ass from your elbow.

The fact that I don't necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it's only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don't give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
"It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence"
Sez who?
Here's a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I've been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who'd agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You're a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)

You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line

sid you are getting worse!
If you bother to read what I wrote, you may realise that I called you nothing of the sort.
The sketch was broadcast at a time when young an old were tuned in to watch new year's festivities, which  was mentioned by a considerable number of those who formally complained.
Your modus operandi seems to to make sweeping decorations that do not allow for any counter opinion. There is seldom any attempt to justify what you are handing down to he rest of us poor mortals.
Tell you what sid- if you can get anyone to put it in writing that your line of reasoning makes perfect sense, I will admit that I am beaten and I will rest my case,

I've consistently debated and rebutted counter opinion! That's what debate is supposed to be!

The only reasonable argument I can see from the counter side is that there should have been a warning on the segment - I didn't watch the programme live, maybe there was?

As for the actual sketch itself, neither you nor anybody else has come up with a single argument as to why it should have been apologised for

The only argument I can see against the sketch is the blasphemy one, which would be ludicrous, we're not living in JC McQuaid's Ireland anymore

Best wishes with your health problems

Sincere thanks for your good wishes, sid.
However, life is too short to waste any more of it going over the same ground again and again.
Don't forget that if you can get even one half sane individual who is willing to swear that he understand what you are on about,  I wikll admit defeat gracefully.

Níor léigh tú an rud a scríobh mé, mar sin.

Sin mar atá an saol!!!

[Lar Naparka]

Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?

I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.

Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn't!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can't tell you ass from your elbow.

The fact that I don't necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it's only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don't give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
"It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence"
Sez who?
Here's a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I've been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who'd agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You're a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)

You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line

sid you are getting worse!
If you bother to read what I wrote, you may realise that I called you nothing of the sort.
The sketch was broadcast at a time when young an old were tuned in to watch new year's festivities, which  was mentioned by a considerable number of those who formally complained.
Your modus operandi seems to to make sweeping decorations that do not allow for any counter opinion. There is seldom any attempt to justify what you are handing down to he rest of us poor mortals.
Tell you what sid- if you can get anyone to put it in writing that your line of reasoning makes perfect sense, I will admit that I am beaten and I will rest my case,

I've consistently debated and rebutted counter opinion! That's what debate is supposed to be!

The only reasonable argument I can see from the counter side is that there should have been a warning on the segment - I didn't watch the programme live, maybe there was?

As for the actual sketch itself, neither you nor anybody else has come up with a single argument as to why it should have been apologised for

The only argument I can see against the sketch is the blasphemy one, which would be ludicrous, we're not living in JC McQuaid's Ireland anymore

Best wishes with your health problems

Sincere thanks for your good wishes, sid.
However, life is too short to waste any more of it going over the same ground again and again.
Don't forget that if you can get even one half sane individual who is willing to swear that he understand what you are on about,  I wikll admit defeat gracefully.

Níor léigh tú an rud a scríobh mé, mar sin.

Sin mar atá an saol!!!

Ní thuigim??

[restorepride]

Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?

I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.

Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn't!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can't tell you ass from your elbow.

The fact that I don't necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it's only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don't give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
"It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence"
Sez who?
Here's a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I've been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who'd agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You're a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)

You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line

sid you are getting worse!
If you bother to read what I wrote, you may realise that I called you nothing of the sort.
The sketch was broadcast at a time when young an old were tuned in to watch new year's festivities, which  was mentioned by a considerable number of those who formally complained.
Your modus operandi seems to to make sweeping decorations that do not allow for any counter opinion. There is seldom any attempt to justify what you are handing down to he rest of us poor mortals.
Tell you what sid- if you can get anyone to put it in writing that your line of reasoning makes perfect sense, I will admit that I am beaten and I will rest my case,

I've consistently debated and rebutted counter opinion! That's what debate is supposed to be!

The only reasonable argument I can see from the counter side is that there should have been a warning on the segment - I didn't watch the programme live, maybe there was?

As for the actual sketch itself, neither you nor anybody else has come up with a single argument as to why it should have been apologised for

The only argument I can see against the sketch is the blasphemy one, which would be ludicrous, we're not living in JC McQuaid's Ireland anymore

Best wishes with your health problems

Sincere thanks for your good wishes, sid.
However, life is too short to waste any more of it going over the same ground again and again.
Don't forget that if you can get even one half sane individual who is willing to swear that he understand what you are on about,  I wikll admit defeat gracefully.

Níor léigh tú an rud a scríobh mé, mar sin.

Sin mar atá an saol!!!

Ní thuigim??

I understand what Sid is pontificating!!   

[Lar Naparka]

Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?

I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.

Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn't!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can't tell you ass from your elbow.

The fact that I don't necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it's only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don't give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
"It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence"
Sez who?
Here's a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I've been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who'd agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You're a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)

You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line

sid you are getting worse!
If you bother to read what I wrote, you may realise that I called you nothing of the sort.
The sketch was broadcast at a time when young an old were tuned in to watch new year's festivities, which  was mentioned by a considerable number of those who formally complained.
Your modus operandi seems to to make sweeping decorations that do not allow for any counter opinion. There is seldom any attempt to justify what you are handing down to he rest of us poor mortals.
Tell you what sid- if you can get anyone to put it in writing that your line of reasoning makes perfect sense, I will admit that I am beaten and I will rest my case,

I've consistently debated and rebutted counter opinion! That's what debate is supposed to be!

The only reasonable argument I can see from the counter side is that there should have been a warning on the segment - I didn't watch the programme live, maybe there was?

As for the actual sketch itself, neither you nor anybody else has come up with a single argument as to why it should have been apologised for

The only argument I can see against the sketch is the blasphemy one, which would be ludicrous, we're not living in JC McQuaid's Ireland anymore

Best wishes with your health problems

Sincere thanks for your good wishes, sid.
However, life is too short to waste any more of it going over the same ground again and again.
Don't forget that if you can get even one half sane individual who is willing to swear that he understand what you are on about,  I wikll admit defeat gracefully.

Níor léigh tú an rud a scríobh mé, mar sin.

Sin mar atá an saol!!!

Ní thuigim??

I understand what Sid is pontificating!!

You do??
Well, God between us and small farms, sid had found a kindred soul! Or has he? You may well understand what he is pontificating about but do you agree with him?
Sin ceist eile.
Remember my position is fairly simple.
The content of the sketch doesn't bother me in the slightest. Its timing does and the fact that over 5,000 people went to the trouble of lodging an official complaint must count for something. At the time I replied to sid, he was the only dissenting voice II had come across.
The timing for me was designed to provoke controversy. To say it was broadcast late at night is only a fig leaf of an excuse. New Year's Eve is a time for families to watch the fireworks etc. from around the world as the new year is ushered in.
That many more than the 5,00 who contacted RTE were offended is, IMO, undeniable. Nobody got in touch to back the decision o broadcast when the controversy unfolded, AFAIK. 
I pointed all this out to sid and here verbatim, is his exact reply.
"Isn't that the same logic that holds "what did Manuela Riedo expect to happen when she walked along that deserted path beside the railway line"?
The George Hook logic
Why were David Quinn and the I Own Her Institute all over #jesuischarlie and "free speech" in 2015?
And why are they the exact opposite now?"
How the hell should I know or care?

I don't particularly like George Hook, I respect the rights of David Quinn and his I Own Her (Iona?) Institute to say whatever they like but I am no fellow traveller and I had given no reason to declare that I was.
But associating me in any way with the poor girl who was raped and strangled as she walked home was grossly offensive.
In my opinion the #jesuischarlie craic was an exercise in futility  but, if anything, it was a massive response to what the supporters saw as an attack on the right to free speech.
That's the side sid should support if there is any logic in what he said!"
Need I go on?
Which side are you on, by the way? Do you support the right of Mac Grianna & co. to freedom of speech and at the same time oppose the right of the #jesuischarlie brigade to exercise the same right?

Following my second post, sid came back with:
"I don't see a connection between Manuela Riedo's murder and the RTE sketch and already said so - so why are you saying I do? "
No, he hasn't said so- not by a country mile.  Maybe you can see some connection but I certainly cant.
How about this?
"Unprompted, seemingly from nowhere, you appeared to state that victims of assault bear some responsibility if they are assaulted - but they don't.
Do you do you think I said that?
I am inclined to rest my case and I'm stopping after only his second reply.
Maybe I should sign off with this from the pulpit stuff:

The self proclaimed Catholic religious right have styled themselves as so called "free speech warriors" - up to and including apologism for and outright defences of many things most reasonable people would consider hate speech - they seem to be just fine with abhorrent, extreme right-wing politics worldwide

Yet now they're up in arms over this sketch - which shows them up as total and utter hypocrites who do not believe a word they previously said

It shows them up as holding moronic opinions - they think it's fine to utter hate speech against others - but it's apparently off limits to legitimately satirise the Catholic right's religious beliefs?

IMO, that is take it or leave it, sid has spoken and he is infallible. Not a hint of an IMO or a reference to anything other than his imagination for his proclamations.
Now. if you agree with all of that, I have nothing more to say.

[restorepride]

Lár na Páirce, a chara!

Do I agree with Sid?!  As you correctly state - sin ceist eile!  I do not agree that RTÉ should have had to issue an apology. If the sketch had been this weekend, after the Mother-and-Baby-Homes Report, I doubt if Archbishop Martin would have spoken on the matter at all.

We are an Irish-speaking family.  If we felt that you are mocking our language by bastardising the spelling of Lár na Páirce, would you feel a need to apologise for the hurt caused?!

[Lar Naparka]

Lár na Páirce, a chara!

Do I agree with Sid?!  As you correctly state - sin ceist eile!  I do not agree that RTÉ should have had to issue an apology. If the sketch had been this weekend, after the Mother-and-Baby-Homes Report, I doubt if Archbishop Martin would have spoken on the matter at all.

We are an Irish-speaking family.  If we felt that you are mocking our language by bastardising the spelling of Lár na Páirce, would you feel a need to apologise for the hurt caused?!

M'anam ón diabhal, you had me worried afor a while but I had made that  clear from the start when I responded to sid and the rest, as the old saying goes, is history.
The origin of my handle goes back to the day I was stuck in a pub watching a Railway Cup game on TV.
Mar is eol duit, the commentary was as Gaeilge.
The guy sitting beside me was one mean looking individual. Six feet plus and built like a tank, the tight crew cut was a giveaway. An American marine was my neighbour and I felt slightly uneasy in case he objected to my presence in any way. I had sat down before I noticed that there were empty seats on either side of him.
I felt unsettled by his presence as he sat there glued to the box. His expression never changed but I could see from his eye movements that he was following the game closely.
All the time, for the duration of the game, he did not utter a word, just signalled to the barman when he wanted a refill. The drink was neat whiskey and the refills came every ten minutes or so. Not a word all the while from mo dhuine.
I was relieved when the game ended and I went to stand up.
The yank beat me to it.
He stood up, polished off his last drink and turned to me, looking me straight in the eye.
"Friend, I don't know what that game is about and I sure caan't follow the lingo but I'll tell you what..."
He put down the glass and then said , " there sure is one thing I do know and that Lar guy is one hell of a player."
He could see that I couldn't understand. I could sense he was a little bit annoyed so I wasn't going to disagree with him.
"Oh, I see what you mean I said. Which Lar did you have in mind?"
He looked at me as if I was a born fool, which I felt I was and was feeling more so by each passing second.
"Which Lar,?"  sez he, " there was only one standout player in that game and that was Lar Naparka.
Years later when I came across gaaboard, I had no problem cooking up with my handle.

[Rudi]

Lár na Páirce, a chara!

Do I agree with Sid?!  As you correctly state - sin ceist eile!  I do not agree that RTÉ should have had to issue an apology. If the sketch had been this weekend, after the Mother-and-Baby-Homes Report, I doubt if Archbishop Martin would have spoken on the matter at all.

We are an Irish-speaking family.  If we felt that you are mocking our language by bastardising the spelling of Lár na Páirce, would you feel a need to apologise for the hurt caused?!

M'anam ón diabhal, you had me worried afor a while but I had made that  clear from the start when I responded to sid and the rest, as the old saying goes, is history.
The origin of my handle goes back to the day I was stuck in a pub watching a Railway Cup game on TV.
Mar is eol duit, the commentary was as Gaeilge.
The guy sitting beside me was one mean looking individual. Six feet plus and built like a tank, the tight crew cut was a giveaway. An American marine was my neighbour and I felt slightly uneasy in case he objected to my presence in any way. I had sat down before I noticed that there were empty seats on either side of him.
I felt unsettled by his presence as he sat there glued to the box. His expression never changed but I could see from his eye movements that he was following the game closely.
All the time, for the duration of the game, he did not utter a word, just signalled to the barman when he wanted a refill. The drink was neat whiskey and the refills came every ten minutes or so. Not a word all the while from mo dhuine.
I was relieved when the game ended and I went to stand up.
The yank beat me to it.
He stood up, polished off his last drink and turned to me, looking me straight in the eye.
"Friend, I don't know what that game is about and I sure caan't follow the lingo but I'll tell you what..."
He put down the glass and then said , " there sure is one thing I do know and that Lar guy is one hell of a player."
He could see that I couldn't understand. I could sense he was a little bit annoyed so I wasn't going to disagree with him.
"Oh, I see what you mean I said. Which Lar did you have in mind?"
He looked at me as if I was a born fool, which I felt I was and was feeling more so by each passing second.
"Which Lar,?"  sez he, " there was only one standout player in that game and that was Lar Naparka.
Years later when I came across gaaboard, I had no problem cooking up with my handle.

Good stuff, enjoyed that and good health to you.

[Rossfan]

Scéal maith a Lar

[restorepride]

Lár na Páirce, a chara!

Do I agree with Sid?!  As you correctly state - sin ceist eile!  I do not agree that RTÉ should have had to issue an apology. If the sketch had been this weekend, after the Mother-and-Baby-Homes Report, I doubt if Archbishop Martin would have spoken on the matter at all.

We are an Irish-speaking family.  If we felt that you are mocking our language by bastardising the spelling of Lár na Páirce, would you feel a need to apologise for the hurt caused?!

M'anam ón diabhal, you had me worried afor a while but I had made that  clear from the start when I responded to sid and the rest, as the old saying goes, is history.
The origin of my handle goes back to the day I was stuck in a pub watching a Railway Cup game on TV.
Mar is eol duit, the commentary was as Gaeilge.
The guy sitting beside me was one mean looking individual. Six feet plus and built like a tank, the tight crew cut was a giveaway. An American marine was my neighbour and I felt slightly uneasy in case he objected to my presence in any way. I had sat down before I noticed that there were empty seats on either side of him.
I felt unsettled by his presence as he sat there glued to the box. His expression never changed but I could see from his eye movements that he was following the game closely.
All the time, for the duration of the game, he did not utter a word, just signalled to the barman when he wanted a refill. The drink was neat whiskey and the refills came every ten minutes or so. Not a word all the while from mo dhuine.
I was relieved when the game ended and I went to stand up.
The yank beat me to it.
He stood up, polished off his last drink and turned to me, looking me straight in the eye.
"Friend, I don't know what that game is about and I sure caan't follow the lingo but I'll tell you what..."
He put down the glass and then said , " there sure is one thing I do know and that Lar guy is one hell of a player."
He could see that I couldn't understand. I could sense he was a little bit annoyed so I wasn't going to disagree with him.
"Oh, I see what you mean I said. Which Lar did you have in mind?"
He looked at me as if I was a born fool, which I felt I was and was feeling more so by each passing second.
"Which Lar,?"  sez he, " there was only one standout player in that game and that was Lar Naparka.
Years later when I came across gaaboard, I had no problem cooking up with my handle.

Brilliant!!  Enjoyed that one!!!  Maigh Eo abú!

[JoG2]

Lár na Páirce, a chara!

Do I agree with Sid?!  As you correctly state - sin ceist eile!  I do not agree that RTÉ should have had to issue an apology. If the sketch had been this weekend, after the Mother-and-Baby-Homes Report, I doubt if Archbishop Martin would have spoken on the matter at all.

We are an Irish-speaking family.  If we felt that you are mocking our language by bastardising the spelling of Lár na Páirce, would you feel a need to apologise for the hurt caused?!

M'anam ón diabhal, you had me worried afor a while but I had made that  clear from the start when I responded to sid and the rest, as the old saying goes, is history.
The origin of my handle goes back to the day I was stuck in a pub watching a Railway Cup game on TV.
Mar is eol duit, the commentary was as Gaeilge.
The guy sitting beside me was one mean looking individual. Six feet plus and built like a tank, the tight crew cut was a giveaway. An American marine was my neighbour and I felt slightly uneasy in case he objected to my presence in any way. I had sat down before I noticed that there were empty seats on either side of him.
I felt unsettled by his presence as he sat there glued to the box. His expression never changed but I could see from his eye movements that he was following the game closely.
All the time, for the duration of the game, he did not utter a word, just signalled to the barman when he wanted a refill. The drink was neat whiskey and the refills came every ten minutes or so. Not a word all the while from mo dhuine.
I was relieved when the game ended and I went to stand up.
The yank beat me to it.
He stood up, polished off his last drink and turned to me, looking me straight in the eye.
"Friend, I don't know what that game is about and I sure caan't follow the lingo but I'll tell you what..."
He put down the glass and then said , " there sure is one thing I do know and that Lar guy is one hell of a player."
He could see that I couldn't understand. I could sense he was a little bit annoyed so I wasn't going to disagree with him.
"Oh, I see what you mean I said. Which Lar did you have in mind?"
He looked at me as if I was a born fool, which I felt I was and was feeling more so by each passing second.
"Which Lar,?"  sez he, " there was only one standout player in that game and that was Lar Naparka.
Years later when I came across gaaboard, I had no problem cooking up with my handle.

. Brilliant Lar

[Ball Hopper]

Great story Lar!

Best wishes on the health front as well...keep up the good spirits.

[screenexile]

Justin Thomas has had his sponsorship with Ralph Lauren cancelled because he said fa**ot when he missed a putt!

[restorepride]

Justin Thomas has had his sponsorship with Ralph Lauren cancelled because he said fa**ot when he missed a putt!

He'll not say it again!