The Pat Kenny Show

neris

Yes texter let's fill Boyle and other small towns in the west full of Muslim refugees. Soon we,ll have the Islamic State of sligo & roscommon

Del.Monte

neris wrote: »

Yes texter let's fill Boyle and other small towns in the west full of Muslim refugees. Soon we,ll have the Islamic State of sligo & roscommon

What about giving Leitrim a fair crack of the whip?

PeterTheNinth

One in four women in experiencing sexual violence..?

I like to see the data behind that. Sounds like a load of rubbish.

PeterTheNinth

This wan is not too heavy on the facts or the details is she?

Roger_007

PeterTheNinth wrote: »

This wan is not too heavy on the facts or the details is she?

Pat is no different from other current affairs radio/TV presenters who always give campaigners for so-called good causes an easy time by allowing them to throw out dubious 'facts' and figures without having to back them up.

Ol' Donie

This Irish Michael Graham fella Pat has on now really adds no value to anything.

I wonder why Pat has him on. Are they short of filler this week?

tommyboy2222

Ol' Donie wrote: »

This Irish Michael Graham fella Pat has on now really adds no value to anything.

I wonder why Pat has him on. Are they short of filler this week?

As a counter balance to the pc groupthink ?

Ol' Donie

tommyboy2222 wrote: »

As a counter balance to the pc groupthink ?

There isn't a counter balance that doesn't talk bollocks?

limnam

Someone on radio who actually knows something about wine.

Who knew

tommyboy2222

Ol' Donie wrote: »

There isn't a counter balance that doesn't talk bollocks?

Does everyone with views differing from yours "talk bollocks" ?

Ol' Donie

tommyboy2222 wrote: »

Does everyone with views differing from yours "talk bollocks" ?

If someone's objective to just to disagree, no matter what the subject of the discussion, they are talking bollocks.

And no, thank you, if someone's view differs from my own, but makes more sense, then I'll change my view.

tommyboy2222

Ol' Donie wrote: »

If someone's objective to just to disagree, no matter what the subject of the discussion, they are talking bollocks.

And no, thank you, if someone's view differs from my own, but makes more sense, then I'll change my view.

What exactly was he disagreeing with ?

It was people protesting Trump and Brexit who were disagreeing with democracy as the result did not go their way.

wnolan1992

tommyboy2222 wrote: »

What exactly was he disagreeing with ?

It was people protesting Trump and Brexit who were disagreeing with democracy as the result did not go there way.

His entire "argument" was that Brexit and Trump were "two fingers to the establishment!" and that this was great. He came across as someone who was just sitting back going "LOL, isn't it great that everything's in chaos now! Hahahah!". Y'know, the type of person who'd normally be treated with the Some People Just Want to Watch the World Burn meme.


Don't get me wrong, there's a debate to be had around immigration, etc, and I for one would welcome more coherent dissenting voices (even if I'd probably disagree with most of what they'd say),but that particular contributor contributed nothing to that. The very definition of filler-radio.

Ol' Donie

tommyboy2222 wrote: »

What exactly was he disagreeing with ?

It was people protesting Trump and Brexit who were disagreeing with democracy as the result did not go their way.

The "Glen Hansard should shut it because there are slightly different tax rules for artists" was an argument worthy of any pre junior cert debating society meeting.

tommyboy2222

wnolan1992 wrote: »

His entire "argument" was that Brexit and Trump were "two fingers to the establishment!" and that this was great. He came across as someone who was just sitting back going "LOL, isn't it great that everything's in chaos now! Hahahah!". Y'know, the type of person who'd normally be treated with the Some People Just Want to Watch the World Burn meme.


Don't get me wrong, there's a debate to be had around immigration, etc, and I for one would welcome more coherent dissenting voices (even if I'd probably disagree with most of what they'd say),but that particular contributor contributed nothing to that. The very definition of filler-radio.

Well I'd agree it's important to hear differing points of view. And in my opinion a lot of contributors to Newstalk have a very similar view of the world which is why I welcome O'Dohertys contributions.

neris

tommyboy2222 wrote: »

Well I'd agree it's important to hear differing points of view. And in my opinion a lot of contributors to Newstalk have a very similar view of the world which is why I welcome O'Dohertys contributions.

I'd say alot of contributors to both newstalk and rte. A very pc nice nice, oh you can't say that kind of view of the world.

Ol' Donie

tommyboy2222 wrote: »

Well I'd agree it's important to hear differing points of view. And in my opinion a lot of contributors to Newstalk have a very similar view of the world which is why I welcome O'Dohertys contributions.

I definitely agree that on Newstalk it's often "liberal" waiting to be offended contributors. I tend to think this way (the "liberal" bit, anyway).

However, I'm open to being convinced I'm wrong. In fact I want to see more opinions, as long as they are informed, and the contributor has some sort of principle.

The problem with that fella - the poor man's Katie Hopkins, from what I can tell - is that his nonsense was just argument for the sake for arguing. Which has no value to anyone.

Snake Plisken

Fair play to Ian Doherty he takes a lot of abuse on Twitter and on his media appearances he did a great job on Claire Byrne two weeks ago and he had a great debate on Pat's show last year with some idiotic pro-migrant SJW professor from one of the Dublin Universities! And weather the SJW's who go on forums like this, twitter or Facebook there are the silent majority who agree with a lot of the points Ian makes!
Newstalk has turned very politically correct with the the self proclaimed "Male Feminist" Moncrieff the drivetime show with O'Donoghue & McInerney more of the same and a poor breakfast show the only ones I listen to now are Pat & George!

foxtrot101

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Fair play to Ian Doherty he takes a lot of abuse on Twitter and on his media appearances he did a great job on Claire Byrne two weeks ago and he had a great debate on Pat's show last year with some idiotic pro-migrant SJW professor from one of the Dublin Universities! And weather the SJW's who go on forums like this, twitter or Facebook there are the silent majority who agree with a lot of the points Ian makes!

Do you always label people who disagree with with you? Ah yes, that silent majority that Marc Coleman and John Waters were so convinced would rise up and defeat same sex marriage referendum. Except they didn't because, on the whole, Ireland is a fairly socially liberal place these days and the silent majority is silent because they don't really exist in great numbers.

DeadHand

foxtrot101 wrote: »

Do you always label people who disagree with with you? Ah yes, that silent majority that Marc Coleman and John Waters were so convinced would rise up and defeat same sex marriage referendum. Except they didn't because, on the whole, is a fairly socially liberal place these days and the silent majority is silent because they don't really exist in great numbers.

Two very separate issues there.

The crowd opposing SSM and the crowd opposing the Islamic plantation of Europe would be very different animals indeed.

Most informed and honest enough about this great "refugee" lie to be against it would be so partly because of the absolute hell that will be brought to Europe for homosexuals if Islamism is allowed to gain a foothold.

On the topic of SSM, Clonskeagh Mosque- that institution unconditionally beloved of the self-hating Irish Left and media- was firmly against it. Yet, none of the same vitriol for them as was meted out to the likes of Walters er al... Funny that.

The silent majority, silent because of the bullying, dogmatic witch hunters of the Left, do exist in Western nations- they made their presence felt in the Brexit campaign, US Elections and will do so again when the Netherlands and France elect anti-immigration governments.

The Irish electorate will likely never get a say on third world immigration (mostly because our betters know we would reject it for the madness it is), yet we are due to be subjected to it without our consent. 4,000 "Syrian refugees" and a few bearded "children" of Calais will be the vanguard. Expect us to be forced into German/Swedish style demographic suicide as the globalists continue their work of dismantling and reducing European nations.

From engaging ordinary people on the topic I firmly believe any referendum on taking "refugees" or third world immigrants in generally would see the No side comprehensively victorious. People see the chaos this invasion is causing elsewhere and want nothing to do with it.

RTE and the Irish media in general present a skewed, biased view of both the migrant situation and the general Irish attitude toward.

foxtrot101

DeadHand wrote: »

Two very separate issues there.

The crowd opposing SSM and the crowd opposing the Islamic plantation of Europe would be very different animals indeed.

Most informed and honest enough about this great "refugee" lie to be against it would be so partly because of the absolute hell that will be brought to Europe for homosexuals if Islamism is allowed to gain a foothold.

On the topic of SSM, Clonskeagh Mosque- that institution unconditionally beloved of the self-hating Irish Left and media- was firmly against it. Yet, none of the same vitriol for them as was meted out to the likes of Walters er al... Funny that.

The silent majority, silent because of the bullying, dogmatic witch hunters of the Left, do exist in Western nations- they made their presence felt in the Brexit campaign, US Elections and will do so again when the Netherlands and France elect anti-immigration governments.

The Irish electorate will likely never get a say on third world immigration (mostly because our betters know we would reject it for the madness it is), yet we are due to be subjected to it without our consent. 4,000 "Syrian refugees" and a few bearded "children" of Calais will be the vanguard. Expect us to be forced into German/Swedish style demographic suicide as the globalists continue their work of dismantling and reducing European nations.

From engaging ordinary people on the topic I firmly believe any referendum on taking "refugees" or third world immigrants in generally would see the No side comprehensively victorious. People see the chaos this invasion is causing elsewhere and want nothing to do with it.

RTE and the Irish media in general present a skewed, biased view of both the migrant situation and the general Irish attitude toward.

Sorry, I'm not even about to get into a conversation with someone who comes out with hyperbolic crap like ..."the Islamic plantation of Europe"..."bullying, dogmatic witch hunters of the Left, do exist in Western nations"...or... "demographic suicide as the globalists continue their work of dismantling and reducing European nations"

PeterTheNinth

DeadHand wrote: »

On the topic of SSM, Clonskeagh Mosque- that institution unconditionally beloved of the self-hating Irish Left and media- was firmly against it. Yet, none of the same vitriol for them as was meted out to the likes of Walters er al... Funny that.

The one thing that really enrages me is the hypocrisy in the media. John Waters got absolutely vilified when he opposed gay marriage with a reasoned argument. Martin O'Neill was vilified when he made a silly "queer" remark, for which he immediately apologised. Ali Selim, the head of the Mosque in Clonskeagh, was on with Ray D'Arcy earlier this year and said that if a Muslim man was gay then he was committing a sin and should "give it up". Not a word was heard from those "champions" of human rights like D'Arcy / Chris Donoghue / Dil / Una Mullaly.

Can you imagine the reaction if John Waters had made those same remarks?

Calhoun

PeterTheNinth wrote: »

The one thing that really enrages me is the hypocrisy in the media. John Waters got absolutely vilified when he opposed gay marriage with a reasoned argument. Martin O'Neill was vilified when he made a silly "queer" remark, for which he immediately apologised. Ali Selim, the head of the Mosque in Clonskeagh, was on with Ray D'Arcy earlier this year and said that if a Muslim man was gay then he was committing a sin and should "give it up". Not a word was heard from those "champions" of human rights like D'Arcy / Chris Donoghue / Dil / Una Mullaly.

Can you imagine the reaction if John Waters had made those same remarks?

That is the bullcrap that comes from progressive liberals who engage in identity politics, if your white male your the devil anything else goes.

Its why your Ian Doherty takes allot of abuse,its funny to see liberals talking about labels when they more than likely label him a racist and misogynist ect.

I think Ireland is sleepwalking its way into a Donald Trump type situation, allot more in Ireland would agree with the likes of Ian Doherty than you think but this can never be vocalized in Ireland as we dont believe in rational debate anymore.

foxtrot101

PeterTheNinth wrote: »

T Ali Selim, the head of the Mosque in Clonskeagh, was on with Ray D'Arcy earlier this year and said that if a Muslim man was gay then he was committing a sin and should "give it up".

And this differs from the catholic church's take on gay sex how exactly?

Calhoun

foxtrot101 wrote: »

And this differs from the catholic church's take on gay sex how exactly?

The difference is the Catholic Church is rightly condemned for its view but people are very much afraid of the consequences of doing so to someone from that fate.

foxtrot101

Calhoun wrote: »

The difference is the Catholic Church is rightly condemned for its view but people are very much afraid of the consequences of doing so to someone from that fate.

If a catholic priest had come out with something similar I think the reaction, or lack of reaction, would be the same.

Calhoun

I think not sure it was only recently on of the priest training schools came under fire in multiple papers over comments on gay priests.

The media is all to willing to jump on the indescretiaindescretians of the catholic church which is good but it should hold all religions to that standard.

Snake Plisken

foxtrot101 wrote: »

If a catholic priest had come out with something similar I think the reaction, or lack of reaction, would be the same.

I'm sure some liberal lefty on here would be jumping up and down on their keyboard if that had happened but hey if some minority group spokesman like Dr Ali Saleem says it that's ok with the right on hipster SJW's like yourself! There is more of us out there then you think!

DeadHand

foxtrot101 wrote: »

Sorry, I'm not even about to get into a conversation with someone who comes out with hyperbolic crap like ..."the Islamic plantation of Europe"..."bullying, dogmatic witch hunters of the Left, do exist in Western nations"...or... "demographic suicide as the globalists continue their work of dismantling and reducing European nations"

None are so blind as those who will not see.

It's the orchestrated movement of a population into an area with strong political (EU: reduced and diluted nations are easier to bully/federalise), religious (gulf states push the influx in this direction and set up mosques as advance bases- virgin lands for Islam to conquer) and economic (neo-liberals: flood Europe with cheap labour) motivations underlying.

It's a plantation.

Keep sleepwalking, like the political class and media, until some unfortunate we "rescue" decides to drive a lorry through a Christmas market in Dublin.

The day is coming- see if you can still maintain your sense of moral superiority on that day.

Consider this- the Middle East has been in a constant state of warfare since Christ was a carpenter. Why is it only in the last few years that the solution is to abandon the borders and actively plant millions of culturally incompatible people in Europe?

Something is deeply rotten at the heart of this.

DeadHand

foxtrot101 wrote: »

If a catholic priest had come out with something similar I think the reaction, or lack of reaction, would be the same.

Not true.

The reaction would be infinitely more public and severe and you know it.