Mariane Finucanes Shannon Peace Camp Show

mike65

Did anyone listen to Mariane Finucanes programme this morning, it was all about the so called Peace Camp at Shannon. The main speakers were a CND student called Katherine who was, er against the war and writer/comic Brendan O'Conner. She was revealed to be as wretched as one might suppose. A real pie in the sky sanctimonous whiner. Brendan O'Conner had her for breakfast.

Its an hour long-
http://www.rte.ie/rams/ecs/radio_weekly/thu/marianfinucane.ram

Mike.

Bateman

Disgracefully one-sided. It must have been a fine solo comedy effort from Brendan O Connor, because several people took the woman apart. Finucane showed no desire to let a debate ensue, she just let persona after person tear shreds out of the woman. She may have been a bit of a dove, and not very articulate, but thats no excuse for such butcher journalism.

Cork

How can you out to Iraq to talk about one sided?

I think that Iraqi forces have the power to shoot dead 95% of protesters and Keep the remaining 5% for interergation. This was on the Vincent Browne Radio show when he went down to the Shannon Peace Camp.

We have freedom of Speach on this country. We also have an elected government to make decisions on foriegn policy.

If the governments action is unconstitutional. Let some of the TDs that don't support it - make a challange in the courts.

sceptre

Originally posted by Cork
How can you out to Iraq to talk about one sided?

I've no idea what that means

I think that Iraqi forces have the power to shoot dead 95% of protesters and Keep the remaining 5% for interergation. This was on the Vincent Browne Radio show when he went down to the Shannon Peace Camp.

Irrelevant to the discussion of the Marian Finucane show. The US have the power to do the same. The question isn't whether they can - it's whether they will.

We have freedom of Speach on this country.

What Bateman said fairly plainly was that there was one person one one side of the argument and a few people (ie "more than one") given time on the other side of the argument. Freedom of speech is irrelevant - we've a limited number of national stations and I, for example, wouldn't be allowed set one up just because I wanted to. The right to freedom of speech isn't absolute - nor is it guarded and maintained in Irish law as carefully as it is in US law. Irrelevant.

We also have an elected government to make decisions on foriegn policy.

Yes we do. Back to the relevance thing again. They're also bound by constitutional provisions designed in part to stop an elected government (or an elected Dail) riding roughshod over the rights of the people. Those provisions weren't inserted so that we could trust the government to do what's best - they were inserted to give the people rights that couldn't legally (or illegally)be taken away without the approval of the people.

If the governments action is unconstitutional. Let some of the TDs that don't support it - make a challange in the courts.

Maybe they will. Maybe they won't. Thankfully the right to make a constitutional challenge in the courts isn't limited to elected members of political parties. It does cost quite a bit of money though. Standing up and making a firm stand in either direction would cost any TD votes. It's one of the reasons we seem to have so many spineless unopinionated slow people in parliament.

Cork

What Bateman said fairly plainly was that there was one person one one side of the argument and a few people (ie "more than one") given time on the other side of the argument.

I actually did not hear the interview - But I heard Brendan O Connor was quiet funny and raised some ackward questions.

I was not aware that the person on the other side was out numbered. This normally is refered to as an ambush.

I am all for debate & the exchange of ideas & opposed to ambushing.

But I hear Brendan O Connor won, game, set & match.