Friday, April 25, 2008
“poorly judged and tasteless”
A couple of days ago I was presented with a copy of the Gown by a fairly outraged student, and I have to say that I wasn’t all that impressed by their attitude to a Queen’s student, no matter what he did or did not do, being found dead. Chekov isn’t impressed either.
Michael Shilliday @ 10:35 AM
‘The point being that if you are holding yourself up as an example of the university system’
when was i doing this P&J;, i was merely feeling nostalgic for my time in the Holylands.
Posted by on Apr 25, 2008 @ 07:44 PMFew Prods attend Queens because of RCs and Republicans. Queens have an image problem that they need to address.
I know that there are Unionist groups in the University pushing the rights of prods and Unionists in the University, namely the Democratic Unionist Party.
Take a walk around the Holylands after 1pm onwards and see who is causing the trouble. You can easily identify them by their football tops.
Posted by on Apr 26, 2008 @ 03:47 PMQueens Student has a point. The students in the Holy Land area do let the side down. There have even been TV documentaries on their contempt for the locals.
Was this man frightened to death? Bouncers often have heart attacks as all the thugs want a piece of them. Standing up to an unruly mob of students night after night would not do the old ticker any good. And then to have these Tyrone thugs dsance on your grave.Of course, the other thing is: should people like this be at university at all? Maybe we should go back to the Doing Law or Doing Life days with more emphasis on the Doing Life stream. Then the Huns can get their old screw jobs back. Win-win.
Posted by on Apr 26, 2008 @ 06:46 PM‘And then to have these Tyrone thugs dsance on your grave.’
Apologies Dave if i have missed it, but what is the beef with the Red Handers?(apart from the misappropriation of the symbol by certain undesireables)
I didn’t see the greatest county in Ireland being lambasted anywhere in the story.Posted by on Apr 27, 2008 @ 12:47 AMAs much as you would like to accuse students of immaturity in the case of this man in the holylands, let me point out a few things:
1. This man had a history of drug taking and violence, as I, who live near the area, experienced as he threatened my flatmates and offered to “sort us out if we wanted something”.
2. Its very well scolding the students for their attitude, but if your children had been subject to this influence, you too would be rejoucing as they would now feel safe.
3. Finally, how narrow minded must you people be if you cannot construct an argument without resurrecting the past problems of tribalism in this country. Congraduation for proving to students that people like yourselves lack the capacity for constructive arguments, and therefore mean that students will continue to ignore whatever pleas you make.Posted by on Apr 28, 2008 @ 11:58 AMOh and its statistically proven that young protestants dont access universitys in NI as their schools encourage them to go to England and they are less likely to return. There is a rising willingness in young Catholics to push for better jobs due to pressure by parents.
Posted by on Apr 28, 2008 @ 12:00 PM“This man had a history of drug taking and violence, as I, who live near the area, experienced as he threatened my flatmates and offered to “sort us out if we wanted something”.”
That may well be the case, but the crux of the article isn’t to defend the man as is made perfectly clear. He may well have had a history of drug taking and violence and the law should have taken its course in protecting society against him. That is not justification for publicly celebrating his death. As for drug-taking and violence, I have lived in South Belfast for a good many years, and there are students who are guilty of both these things. I wouldn’t for a minute think that anyone should celebrate if a student who took drugs and engaged in vandalism or violence was found dead.
“Its very well scolding the students for their attitude, but if your children had been subject to this influence, you too would be rejoucing as they would now feel safe.”I certainly would not be rejoicing. I would have more dignity and decency than to rejoice in someone’s death.
Posted by on Apr 28, 2008 @ 01:38 PMQueens Student, let’s hear some examples of the “image problem” at Queens… you’re making it sound like Crossmaglen or something.
I think if you took a survey of queens students, you’d find that most feel that the university is a neutral environment - to suggest that protestants are put off by the uni is RIDICULOUS. Obviously you’re just a protestant with a massive chip on your shoulder and feel “discriminated” against somehow…
oh and the DUP and UUP at Queens are hardly “pushing the rights for prods” - becuase protestants are hardly disciminated against or denied any rights that Catholic students get… quit your little injustice fantasy and grow up.
Posted by on Apr 28, 2008 @ 08:13 PMPoint taken that the man did not deserve to have his death publically praised but you can understand the relief of a large group of young adults that the will not be subject to intimidation. You can complain that the article could have been written more compassionately, but the students relief you cannot measure or understand.
As for the students taking drugs, you would not be so rigourous in your defence of this man had he been selling drugs in your area. Indeed, for your community and childrens sake you would be glad to get rid of him. His death as a person and father was not desirable, but the end of the drug dealer was.
Posted by on Apr 28, 2008 @ 11:17 PMbrock, i know of a few students in that area who deal e and speed every weekend...will u celebrate their deaths too if, god forbid, anything happens to them. you are one sick cU_nt trying to justify this. a bit like pete baker rejoicing at republican deaths.
Posted by on Apr 28, 2008 @ 11:42 PM“You can complain that the article could have been written more compassionately, but the students’ relief you cannot measure or understand.”
I’m not sure that it should have been written at all. And I don’t buy the line as propounded by Rory et al that students shouldn’t know any better. I’m fairly certain that at 18-19 people are quite aware that trumpeting someone’s death on the front of a newspaper as a boon for the community is not appropriate.
“As for the students taking drugs, you would not be so rigourous in your defence of this man had he been selling drugs in your area. Indeed, for your community and childrens sake you would be glad to get rid of him. His death as a person and father was not desirable, but the end of the drug dealer was.”
I’m not defending the man. I’ve made that perfectly clear. Again I stress that I do not know what this man did, but if a drug-dealer in my area had died, whilst I might feel that the area would not be damaged by his loss, I would prefer if he had been dealt with by the law and I certainly would remain compassionate enough not to wish his death transparently celebrated on the front page of a newspaper. Did the newspaper attempt to expose the alleged misdemeanours of the man before he died? If so there was certainly no indication of this in the article. The tenor seemed to be, he’s dead and now we can say what we like. It is a cowardly article.
Posted by on Apr 29, 2008 @ 08:41 AM‘18-19 year olds’ rather than people.
Posted by on Apr 29, 2008 @ 08:42 AM“I have to say that I wasn’t all that impressed by their attitude to a Queen’s student, no matter what he did or did not do, being found dead.”
This is confusing, the dead man was not a Queen’s student Michael.
Describing the article as ‘trumpeting’ a death is hardly fair, of the 2 quotes which seem to be offending, one is from a HC judge familiar with Arbuckle, the other is from a student who also knew him. The fact she describes relief HAD she STILL lived in the street is shocking in itself and testament to the grip he had on the area rather than a general desire among students to purge residents from the Holylands, which is the manner some seemed to have framed this issue within.
As for the police, even when they did bother to arrest him, he was soon back out again with wrists lightly slapped if at all. I’m sorry for those hurt by his death, but i am also tired of the need to eulogise and forget all sins once someone dies. It was news! For students, who are continually portrayed as the problem in the area, covering an intimidating presence who in sad circumstances is gone.
The area has become a dumping ground for rehoused criminals who won’t be taken elsewhere, including sex offenders. Here we are, another week, another rape, this time Botanic Gardens. The small no. of students who are anti-social in respect of noise do not make the area the dangerous place it is to live in.Posted by on Apr 30, 2008 @ 02:27 PM“Did the newspaper attempt to expose the alleged misdemeanours of the man before he died? If so there was certainly no indication of this in the article”
I will direct you back to the article. I think people should actually READ or RE-READ it before passing judgment.
Posted by on Apr 30, 2008 @ 02:32 PMAD
“The fact she describes relief HAD she STILL lived in the street is shocking in itself and testament to the grip he had on the area rather than a general desire among students to purge residents from the Holylands, which is the manner some seemed to have framed this issue within.”
That is certainly not the way that I have framed the matter and it’s not the way Michael has framed it either as far as I can tell. The issue for me is simply an inappropriate article which used the occasion of a man’s death to trumpet his demise as a boon for the community and repeat unsubstantiated allegations about him. The fact that the quote you mention was not attributed and came from someone who no longer lives in Jerusalem Street just about sums up the article.
“As for the police, even when they did bother to arrest him, he was soon back out again with wrists lightly slapped if at all. I’m sorry for those hurt by his death, but i am also tired of the need to eulogise and forget all sins once someone dies. It was news! For students, who are continually portrayed as the problem in the area, covering an intimidating presence who in sad circumstances is gone.”
Firstly no-one is suggesting that this man should have been eulogised or forgiven. Neither should his death have been celebrated by a front page spread under the headline chosen by The Gown. Secondly the article did not in any respect convey that there were any ‘sad circumstances’ in the man’s death whatsoever.
“The area has become a dumping ground for rehoused criminals who won’t be taken elsewhere, including sex offenders. Here we are, another week, another rape, this time Botanic Gardens. The small no. of students who are anti-social in respect of noise do not make the area the dangerous place it is to live in.”
That is another issue altogether and one that students have the right to raise. Was this man a convicted sex offender? If he was it might be appropriate to discuss the issue of sex crime in an article about him. If he wasn’t, then tacking on a discussion of sex crime in an article concerned with his death is making a connection that is not actually there.
“I will direct you back to the article. I think people should actually READ or RE-READ it before passing judgment.”
I have read it and reread it. It does not mention anywhere that allegations were made in the paper about this man before his death. On the contrary a box informs us that attacks on cars were reported in the paper, but that the allegations made in the latest article were not included in that previous story.
Posted by on May 01, 2008 @ 08:19 AM
