• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Does the Irish Times now run the country?


Big Brother

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2011
Messages
2,732
It's chairman has been appointed head of the Constitutional Convetion.

And it's agenda - abortion, same sex marriage, secularising education and protecting its public sector readerhip - is now clearly given government priorty over what we thought the government was elected for (fixing the economy, jobs).

The Irish Times is bought by about 2 per cent of the population - mostly a public service and slightly left of centre elite who want to replace the catholic church with their secular equivalents (HSE, Bureaucracy, quangos). Members of its trust include that secular equivalent of John Charles McQuaid himself, David Begg (who also sat on board of our financial regulator)

The fact that it has set an agenda on abortion - using tragic death of Savita - to get all parties and RTE to dance to its tune and the fact that its chairman is heading the constitutional convention shows its awesome power.

So the question is: Do our politicians govern in the interests of the Irish People? Or the Irish Times.

/MOD/ This thread merged here: http://www.politics.ie/forum/media/201693-irish-times-paper-liberal-intelligensia.html /MOD/
 
Last edited by a moderator:

bob3367

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
8,083
It's chairman has been appointed head of the Constitutional Convetion.

And it's agenda - abortion, same sex marriage, secularising education and protecting its public sector readerhip - is now clearly given government priorty over what we thought the government was elected for (fixing the economy, jobs).

The Irish Times is bought by about 2 per cent of the population - mostly a public service and slightly left of centre elite who want to replace the catholic church with their secular equivalents (HSE, Bureaucracy, quangos). Members of its trust include that secular equivalent of John Charles McQuaid himself, David Begg (who also sat on board of our financial regulator)

The fact that it has set an agenda on abortion - using tragic death of Savita - to get all parties and RTE to dance to its tune and the fact that its chairman is heading the constitutional convention shows its awesome power.

So the question is: Do our politicians govern in the interests of the Irish People? Or the Irish Times.
Nah, its still only a newspaper.
 

statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
56,230
It's chairman has been appointed head of the Constitutional Convetion.

And it's agenda - abortion, same sex marriage, secularising education and protecting its public sector readerhip - is now clearly given government priorty over what we thought the government was elected for (fixing the economy, jobs).

The Irish Times is bought by about 2 per cent of the population - mostly a public service and slightly left of centre elite who want to replace the catholic church with their secular equivalents (HSE, Bureaucracy, quangos). Members of its trust include that secular equivalent of John Charles McQuaid himself, David Begg (who also sat on board of our financial regulator)

The fact that it has set an agenda on abortion - using tragic death of Savita - to get all parties and RTE to dance to its tune and the fact that its chairman is heading the constitutional convention shows its awesome power.

So the question is: Do our politicians govern in the interests of the Irish People? Or the Irish Times.
I doubt the Health Minister likes the IT all that much.

Primary care list altered evening before launch - The Irish Times - Sat, Nov 24, 2012
 

Big Brother

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2011
Messages
2,732
Indeed not.

IT seems to follow Labour agenda in attacking him whenever he resists Labour's agenda.

IT also always praises FG/FF politicians as "mature" when they agree with IT on social issues. And it always attacks any politician who disagrees with that agenda.

IT chairman Tom Arnold is a decent and respected man. But I don't know given IT's clear contempt for our constitution and its radical left agenda on social issues - driven by a lot of journalists with hard left backgrounds - that any IT person should head the constitutional review.

Or that politicians should be pandering to its demands for legilsation on abortion when there is no proof and much doubt if our legislative regime on abortion had anything to do with Savita's death.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
40,632
Surely the process depends on finding people who would like to change things in order to let them express their reasoning to the public who will then vote on it?

What would be the point in appointing people who would prefer to leave the Constitution unchanged?
 

statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
56,230
Indeed not.

IT seems to follow Labour agenda in attacking him whenever he resists Labour's agenda.

IT also always praises FG/FF politicians as "mature" when they agree with IT on social issues. And it always attacks any politician who disagrees with that agenda.

IT chairman Tom Arnold is a decent and respected man. But I don't know given IT's clear contempt for our constitution and its radical left agenda on social issues - driven by a lot of journalists with hard left backgrounds - that any IT person should head the constitutional review.

Or that politicians should be pandering to its demands for legilsation on abortion when there is no proof and much doubt if our legislative regime on abortion had anything to do with Savita's death.
So this is really just another anti-abortion thread with labour as the villains of the piece?
 

Big Brother

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2011
Messages
2,732
Must say though that the business supplement is good.

And John Waters, Fintan O'Toole Breda O'Brien Stephen Collins and Noel Whelan are a great read.

When not cheerleading for democrats in US, foreign coverage pretty good too.

But the news editorial line is clearly no longer "paper of record" and is clearly now agenda driven by hard left issues.

The whole country wants jobs and recovery. But the elitist Irish Times is talking about abortion and same sex marriage.

Typical D4 aloofness if you ask me. And ireelevance.

And yet our politicians dance to its tune.....

I put it down to the national inferiority complex that the IT - long a unionist paper - so deliberately cultivated to keep the catholic natives ("the white n***ers" as one former trust chariman Major MacDowell referred to them) in their place.
 

Killerbank

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
904
It's chairman has been appointed head of the Constitutional Convetion.

And it's agenda - abortion, same sex marriage, secularising education and protecting its public sector readerhip - is now clearly given government priorty over what we thought the government was elected for (fixing the economy, jobs).

I cannot see any abortion agenda in the Irish Times. If anything it has become decidedly more "pro-life" in its tone since the change of editor. Note the long diatribe by pro-life fanatic William Binchy last week.....
 

stoichkov

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2010
Messages
2,509
i am becoming ever more convinced that big brother is on the longest, funniest wum of all time.
 

Eoin Coir

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2012
Messages
16,632
Is it not great we have the IT. Imagine the Indo/Sindo/Daily Mail. FFS.
 

mr. jings

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
8,095
Jews, abortions, unionism, gay marriage...two pages in and this thread has everything.
 

Kerrygold

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
4,748
Indeed not.

IT seems to follow Labour agenda in attacking him whenever he resists Labour's agenda.

IT also always praises FG/FF politicians as "mature" when they agree with IT on social issues. And it always attacks any politician who disagrees with that agenda.

IT chairman Tom Arnold is a decent and respected man. But I don't know given IT's clear contempt for our constitution and its radical left agenda on social issues - driven by a lot of journalists with hard left backgrounds - that any IT person should head the constitutional review.

Or that politicians should be pandering to its demands for legilsation on abortion when there is no proof and much doubt if our legislative regime on abortion had anything to do with Savita's death.
I stopped reading after that.
 

bob3367

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
8,083
i am becoming ever more convinced that big brother is on the longest, funniest wum of all time.
For someone who has major issues with it, he seems to know an awful lot about it.

Would he not just be better off not buying it, rather than having a whinge about it?
 

ShankillFalls

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
380
I put it down to the national inferiority complex that the IT - long a unionist paper - so deliberately cultivated to keep the catholic natives ("the white n***ers" as one former trust chariman Major MacDowell referred to them) in their place.
This thread is hilarious.

It's a pity they didn't manage to keep the catholics like Seanie "no ************************************g Protestant is going to take my bank" FitzPatrick down. We mightn't be as screwed as we are.
 
Top