Garth Brooks Comeback Special *ALL 5 SHOWS CANCELLED* READ FIRST POST

mikom

seligehgit wrote: »

Absolutely despicable behaviour by those people who issued death threats against that local resident who took out the injunction.It's his constitutional right to do same if he so wishes and not have people ride roughshoud over his property rights.

miju wrote: »

And it is theirs to make their feelings known to him regardless of the level of intelligence involved.

Yep, it's their constitutional right to issue death threats.

Up next......... How to fashion your passport into a makeshift shank.

KoolKid

The story of DCC offering 4 nights but threatening 3 if its not accepted ,suggests to me they are more than happy to break their own rules & guidelines.
If that is true how can they claim the decision of three was based on the impact more would have on the area.

leahyl

Ah here lads, you couldn't make this stuff up like!

A V A

Corholio wrote: »

To be honest I hope the gigs can be played and got over with so a lot of bitterness towards the wrong people can be lessened a bit.

He should be doing the 3 at least, hopefully he grows up and ends up playing some anyway.

His letter is quite sly though "....how people should be treated". Ain't no one treating people bad except the ones who broke the permissions.

what an absolute gobshoite :rolleyes:

latynova

Sala wrote: »

No one has the right to make their "feelings known" by making death threats against someone- that's why it's a crime.

It is incredible that you have to explain that to somebody.

Who is the idiot who thinks that somebody who is exercising his legal rights such receive death threats? You'd have to be as stupid as the death threat people to even begin to agree with them.

Shouldn't the mod kick this person out?

The guy who took out the injunction was well within his rights. It's only in Ireland that you have to be afraid of doing the right thing and standing up for yourself and others.

Also, I'm about 4km from Croke Park and I could hear all the 1D songs.

OldGoat

Hang on. Who cancelled the 5 gigs? I thought that was Garths idea. Yet now according to his letter he has just learnt that the gigs have been cancelled?

If he wants the gigs to go ahead then let the promoter apply for new dates and a new event license for next year. He might get his 5 that way.

latynova

OldGoat wrote: »

Hang on. Who cancelled the 5 gigs? I thought that was Garths idea. Yet now according to his letter he has just learnt that the gigs have been cancelled?

Does anybody believe that Garth even knows about the letter?

mikom

latynova wrote: »

Also, I'm about 4km from Croke Park and I could hear all the 1D songs.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

KoolKid wrote: »

The story of DCC offering 4 nights but threatening 3 if its not accepted ,suggests to me they are more than happy to break their own rules guidelines.
If that is true how can they claim the decision of three was based on the impact more would have on the area.

Precisely and can you imagine how this sounded down the phone.

DCC:
"Well Mr.Aiken and Mr/Brooks, I'm sorry to inform you that Dublin City planning authorities are unable to grant you the five licences for the concerts, as due to an agreement the GAA have with the local residents which restricts them to only holding three non-sporting events at Croke Park per year, which they have already used up with One Direction.. but sure listen, we are still willing to offer you three.. how does that sound?"

Brooks:
"Well, to be honest, I don't think that's very fair on the 160,000 fans that have bought tickets for the final two shows".

DCC:
"Okay, how about four.. four, will give you four, but now only if you guarantee us that you'll do four. You agree to that and we'll shake on it".

Yet people will still say fair play to the DCC for sticking to their rules. Gas.

ManOfMystery

It's all a bit weird. When I got the Ticketmaster email saying refunds would be issued next Tuesday, I thought to myself that gives all involved a bit of breathing space and a small, small chance to salvage things.

I don't know if that was an intentional move by TM or if it legitimately takes until next Tuesday for their systems to sort out the process of refunding. As has been said though, if it was a deliberate move it's quite unfair to those who have begun cancelling flights and such.

Still - better to salvage the whole thing and please 80% of the people coming, than to dump it and piss off 100%. I think the whole situation got out of hand, things escalated and there was stubbornness not just on Brooks' part but also the residents, the DCC and Aiken. Now that they've all realised how much money is being pissed down the drain and the general backlash this is receiving, there's a bit of backtracking going on and I wouldn't be surprised at all if the whole thing gets reinstated for the 5 nights originally planned - with some kind of golden handshake of course.

shoppergal

Agh, I cancelled my hotel booking, my babysitter and my annual leave from work today and now this. Sick of it at this stage, just want my refund.

mikom

To the protesters.... forget about your jobs, childrens schooling etc.
Come stay in Carlow.

Well thought out there FG.

mrsbyrne

miju wrote: »

He has permanently withdrawn it on basis he has had a change of heart / realizes the damage and the fact he had to stay in a b and b last night such was the amount if threats him and his family recieved and rightly so

Did you really write this!?! This is horrendous! Do you not have family! Do you really think that your rights override someone else's? Do you realise that you are saying threatening children with violence is justified? Over a f**king pop concert?
How disgusting can you get? You deserve absolutely nothing and I hope you never get to see your bloody hero!

j8wk2feszrnpao

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

They were in discussions with Aiken all along and gave no indication that any of the concerns they had, would result in licence refusal for any of the nights.

Did they give an indication that they would proceed? No, they didn't. Because full submission hadn't being made, and then they had to wait for possible objections, and then study the objections, and then try remediate the situation before coming to a conclusion.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

They do in their arse require ten weeks, quite talking nonsense.

Can you not be bothered to read what is posted? It was already pointed out what occurs in those 10 weeks. If you can't take the time to read replies, or even try research the process, then try not to ask foolish questions.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

They did. Four weeks before the deadline and you are ignoring the fact that they were in discussions with DCC for months prior and that too is part of the process of applying for licences.

How am I ignoring that they were in discussion with the DCC? An objection could not be made until the submission of the request. Had Aiken applied earlier, it would have given greater time for a possible resolution to be found.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

It shouldn't have taken them almost three months to inform the promotor that they were refusing two licences. No matter which way you try to spin it.

All the spin is coming from you as you try to deflect all the blame on DCC. It didn't take them 3 months to come to a decision, do some research and don't be so lazy.

latynova

mikom wrote: »

To the protesters.... forget about your jobs, childrens schooling etc.
Come stay in Carlow.

Well thought out there FG.

1. Is this for real?

2. How would they bring their kids to school/get to work, etc?

3. Why should they vacate their homes at great inconvenience to themselves to that Aiken/Garth can get richer?

4. Why should they have to stay in a hotel that Garth wouldn't stay in?

mrsbyrne

calex71 wrote: »

I'm not sure what you are saying, it's right he stayed in a b&b because of threats or it's right he received threats??????

Miju (a fully grown adult) is so upset that he/she is not going to a pop concert that they feel it was only right and proper that a man and his family receive death threats to the point were he had to go to a B&B.
Its jaw dropping.
And they wonder why the Residents and DCC don't want them.
Scumbaggery st its finest.

miju

mikom wrote: »

Yep, it's their constitutional right to issue death threats.

Up next......... How to fashion your passport into a makeshift shank.

Can you tell me where i said its a persons constitutional right to make death threats??

Oh you cant because I never said that , yeah thought so :P:P:P:P:P

mikom

miju wrote: »

Can you tell me where i said its a persons constitutional right to make death threats??

Oh you cant because I never said that , yeah thought so :P:P:P:P:P

Would you like a jellytot?

miju

mikom wrote: »

Would you like a jellytot?

Believe it or not Im actually eating a packet right this moment with my coffee (true story :D )

mikom

miju wrote: »

Believe it or not Im actually eating a packet right this moment with my coffee (true story :D )

For coffee read "Capri sun".

miju

mikom wrote: »

For coffee read "Capri sun".

Urrrgh Capri Sun is pish

latynova

mikom wrote: »

For coffee read "Capri sun".

Funny, for coffee I had read that blue 'power' drink in the plastic bottle.

cython

latynova wrote: »

1. Is this for real?

2. How would they bring their kids to school/get to work, etc?

3. Why should they vacate their homes at great inconvenience to themselves to that Aiken/Garth can get richer?

4. Why should they have to stay in a hotel that Garth wouldn't stay in?

Agree with the sentiment of most of this, but as you are the second person to bring up getting kids to school - it's July, what school?!

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Did they give an indication that they would proceed? No, they didn't. Because full submission hadn't being made, and then they had to wait for possible objections, and then study the objections, and then try remediate the situation before coming to a conclusion.

Both Aiken and the Gaa have released public statements which make it clear that at no point, from the announcement of the concerts until July 2nd, did the DCC ever give an indication that they would not licence the five concerts, in any of the many meetings they had with them. Not once did they show concern that 400,000 tickets were sold. Had they done so, obviously Aiken would not have bothered applying for five licences.

Can you not be bothered to read what is posted? It was already pointed out what occurs in those 10 weeks. If you can't take the time to read replies, or even try research the process, then try not to ask foolish questions.

Right back atacha. The fact that you are saying that, means my retort of that point went right over your head. Maybe re-read what I wrote and this time the penny might drop.

How am I ignoring that they were in discussion with the DCC? An objection could not be made until the submission of the request. Had Aiken applied earlier, it would have given greater time for a possible resolution to be found.

He couldn't have applied earlier, as he has said many times. There is a process before licence application also. Funny how you want to accept that the DCC need months and months of time to do what they need to do, but you just act like the promoter needs to buy and stamp and an envelope. Aiken applied for the licences four weeks before the deadline, thereby showing that he was not interested in living things to the last minute, as is being bandied about. There was oceans of time for them to make a decision. At any stage in their pre application discussions they could have suggested that they would be unable to grant five licences due to the GAA / Residents agreement. The applications would not have needed to have been made before they said that. It's bs to say that they would.

All the spin is coming from you as you try to deflect all the blame on DCC. It didn't take them 3 months to come to a decision, do some research and don't be so lazy.

It was almost three months before they received the application for the licences and July 2nd when they decided to announce their refusal to grant all five. Slice that any way you like, but there is no way it should have taken them that long to make that phone call. No way. Especially considering it was just three weeks away at that stage and 160,000 people were holding tickets for the fates they were refusing to issue licences for.

mikom

cython wrote: »

Agree with the sentiment of most of this, but as you are the second person to bring up getting kids to school - it's July, what school?!

You've heard of playschools... right, also known to some as Montessori.

cython

mikom wrote: »

You've heard of playschools... right, also known to some as Montessori.

Oh come on, if you're going to down that route then the same people shouldn't be permitted to bring their children on holidays at all either. Realistically though, they do, and most montessori "schools" also overlap with a daycare function, which would not be necessary they're not in the locality.

I'm not trying to be dismissive of the potential value of a montessori school, but bringing it into this is clutching at straws, as per the holiday example.

mikom

cython wrote: »

Oh come on, if you're going to down that route then the same people shouldn't be permitted to bring their children on holidays at all either.

Are these "forced" super, fun, happy, Garth Brooks holidays?
The ones where you take time off work?

Happyman42

mikom wrote: »

Are these "forced" super, fun, happy, Garth Brooks holidays?
The ones where you take time off work?

'To Hell Or To Carlow'!

latynova

cython wrote: »

Oh come on, if you're going to down that route then the same people shouldn't be permitted to bring their children on holidays at all either. Realistically though, they do, and most montessori "schools" also overlap with a daycare function, which would not be necessary they're not in the locality.

I'm not trying to be dismissive of the potential value of a montessori school, but bringing it into this is clutching at straws, as per the holiday example.

Why should *anybody* be expected to move out of their HOMES to accommodate a private business venutre???

Okay, forget about the schools, works, etc. People don't have to give any reason for not wanting to/not being willing to leave their HOME.

cython

mikom wrote: »

Are these "forced" super, fun, happy, Garth Brooks holidays?
The ones where you take time off work?

So rather than try to address the specific point I questioned, you digress and resort to flippancy? Nice. It has been about the standard of debate from plenty of posters on this thread though, to be fair.