O'Toole v Dooley on Late Late Show

Snickers Man

Don't wish too hard:you might get what you asked for and live to regret it.

Anybody see the Irish Times' Fintan O'Toole on the Late Late Show debating the issue of Islamic immigration into Ireland with the Sunday Independent's Mark Dooley last Friday (Sep 16th)?

Fintan O'Toole is for many the epitome of the suave intellectual liberal journalist. Earnest, insufferably self righteous, eloquent to a degree that is impossibly unattainable to most people, well read, high minded and not afraid to use his public position as a national journalist to attack the sacred cows that many believe are core to our distinct Irish culture.

My parents can't stand him.

I hope they were watching the Late Late on Friday because they would have learned that there is something worse than a zealous, self righteous, presumptuous left winger and that is a zealous, self righteous, presumptuous right winger. What is more, despite the bleatings of the latter that the Irish press is still dominated by a liberal left-wing elite, the facts are that the opinion pages of most Irish papers are now almost the exclusive preserve of the right.

Even the Irish Times,notwithstanding the regular contributions of Mr O'Toole, gives over regular polemical space to the likes of Mark Steyn, John Waters and Kevin Myers.

The Late Late made for quite disturbing viewing in my opinion with Dooley ranting on about the dangers of Islamic immigration and how we are becoming a base for 'international terror.'

Fortunately, O'Toole's intellect and debating skills are such that Dooley had the ass skinned off him and handed back to him on a platter. Highlight of the evening had to be Dooley suggesting that all immigrants to Ireland try to emulate Sean Og O Hailpin and captain their county to an All Ireland hurling final. If all would show the same willingness to assimilate we would have no problem with muliticuturalism.

Which ignores the fact that the O'Hailpin family is probably the most shining example of a multicultural family in the country. Half of them have irish names, the other half have Fijian ones. All are multilingual in Irish, Fijian and English.

Another contribution which depicted how ridiculous is the whole notion of trying to maintain monoculturalism came from the leading Islamic cleric (name escapes me) who spoke from the floor. He is from South Africa but is clearly of Asian origin. But then he revealed that he had an Irish Catholic granny (who doesn't?). 'she would be spinning in her grave listening to this,' he said.

Damn right.

Anybody think Dooley scored any points at all?

Tuars

Dooley's hopeless. Any valid point he has is demolished by his 'chicken little, sky is falling' debating style.

O' Toole caught him nicely on the 'O'Hailpin test'. It's a test that Dooley himself couldn't pass yet he wants to apply it to immigrants.

I'd agree with Dooley on one point. There should be citizenship education and a citizenship test. But it should be compulsory for ALL Irish citizens. The amount of cluelessness among the natives about the rights and responsibilities of the citizen in an enlightened democratic republic is frightening.

If you want to get a real feel for the future of Islam in Ireland just take a look at what has happened to the Catholic church here.

Snickers Man

Tuars wrote:

I'd agree with Dooley on one point. There should be citizenship education and a citizenship test. But it should be compulsory for ALL Irish citizens.

Well I would wholeheartedly agree with that. But I suggest that's a separate argument. I think what you're talking about here is the Information Society which can only be based on people's knowledge of the workings of the society in which they live.

We are most reluctant to demand information and transparency about the way we are governed. It's a major weakness we have. I'm all for teaching that sort of things in school. In fact we used to. When I was in short pants, they called it Civics.

Tuars

I don' think it's a seperate issue at all. If people had a better understanding of what it means to live in a republic then they would be better able to deal with issues such as this. They would also be more inclined to place more value on republican ideals.

I'm constantly amazed that so many people have so little confidence in their own ideals and values that they think that they can be so easily wiped out.

I agree that civic education is a broader issue and it's something that is badly needed. As a country we have a very limited sense of the value of a civic society. And it seems to be getting worse with our increased material affluence. As we become more financially independent as individuals we feel we have less need for the benefits of the collective.

But back to your original point, the way to tackle the so-called threat of Islam is for us to build a stronger civic society through the education of all the people who live here.

dathi1

Another contribution which depicted how ridiculous is the whole notion of trying to maintain monoculturalism came from the leading Islamic cleric (name escapes me) who spoke from the floor. He is from South Africa but is clearly of Asian origin. But then he revealed that he had an Irish Catholic granny (who doesn't?). 'she

I'd go with Trevor Phillips ( himself afro Caribbean ) from the Commission for Racial Equality in the UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3615379.stm I think the same should apply here. ....and that other intellectual Jeremy Clarkson on the multicultural myth: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-525-1705780-3049,00.html

But back to your original point, the way to tackle the so-called threat of Islam is for us to build a stronger civic society through the education of all the people who live here.

like where...oh yeah Holland and the UK?

Dfitzer

I saw the show also and what I could not understand was that the third speaker was not a muslim. The topic of the debate was the rise of Islam and yet they had a Canadian (I think she was Hindu) on the panel. That guy Dooley obviously ahs some problems with O Toole as all his points were basically personal attacks on O Toole.

grumpytrousers

I just found Dooley to be pathetic more than anything else. I mean, I realise it's not a glamour competition, but O'Toole just outclassed him in everything. Whether you agree with O'Toole, he seemed more reasonable, more erudite, more open minded and didn't resort once to petty name calling.

Petty name calling has it's place, for sure, but not in a situation where you're trying to convince people that your doom'n'gloom schtick is, well, more than just that...

Of course - from a purely presentational point of view - Dooley doesn't have THAT either. He didn't make eye contact with anybody - be that presenter, opponents or audience and that just added to the shifty nature of his demeanour...

dathi1

I agree...not the type of Journalist I'd put up against an intellectual buffoon like O'Toole. Dooley also made a show of himself on the Late Late with Robert Fisk on Iraq..he was so far up Bush's arse. I think the RTE hacks picked the worst option to make O'Toole look good. Aine Ni Chonaill of ICP would have been a better bet.

LegacyUser

I saw the "debate" in passing. It was a laugh - I'd never heard of this Dooley guy before, and he is some can of pi*s. O'Toole dominated him, and then humiliated him!

Even if you dont agree/dislike Fintan O'Toole, you have to say that the guy is a polished performer who knows his subject matter inside out. Bringing on some balding right-winger to personally attack him as a line of debate is akin to feeding the Christians to the Lions.

What most of the people in this debate seem to miss is that the threat is not from Islam, but religious fundementalism. In the middle of the last century, fundemental Catholic beliefs were rampant in this country. No religion, albeit Judaism, Catholicism, Islam, is compatible with democracy. It just doesnt work. A true democracy can only work in a secular environment, where everyone is free to express their beliefs and respect those of others. Friday's debate was actually laughable!

Slightly off-topic, but is Dooley gay? He seemed over-preoccupied with homosexual rights as opposed to rights of all minorities, which I thought was the platform he was speaking from. He almost seemed embittered about something?

Tuars

dathi1 wrote:

I'd go with Trevor Phillips ( himself afro Caribbean ) from the Commission for Racial Equality in the UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3615379.stm I think the same should apply here. ....and that other intellectual Jeremy Clarkson on the multicultural myth: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-525-1705780-3049,00.html

I think these articles contradict each other. Phillips is opposed to separatism while Clarkson supports it.

dathi1 wrote:

like where...oh yeah Holland and the UK?

Given the large Muslim populations in these countries (3.5 million in the UK and almost 1 million in Holland) you would expect to have seen a lot more 7/7 style attacks if the Muslim populations were as radicalised and separatist as Dooley suggests.

simu

Tuars wrote:

Given the large Muslim populations in these countries (3.5 million in the UK and almost 1 million in Holland) you would expect to have seen a lot more 7/7 style attacks if the Muslim populations were as radicalised and separatist as Dooley suggests.

Exactly. I saw the end of that show and it was pretty cringe-worthy in terms of quality of debate tbh.

Snickers Man

dathi1 wrote:

I'd go with ....that other intellectual Jeremy Clarkson on the multicultural myth: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-525-1705780-3049,00.html

My God. Jeremy Clarkson saying something intelligent and generous!!!! He's losing his edge!!!!

All the words that bubble up here like multiculturalism, separatism, etc etc could be replaced by one older more all embracing and simpler word: tolerance.

It's human nature that people will migrate, mingle, coalesce and generally get on with one another. You don't have to force Fijians to play hurling or Muslims to eat hairy bacon. You just let people get along with their lives and as long as they respect the reasonable laws of the land then there should be little problem.

My understanding of multiculturalism is much closer to what Clarkson is talking about: the ability to live and let live. OK so he knows very few black people. Neither do I. Even when I lived in England. That doesn't mean that I couldn't go along to the Notting Hill carnival which is a riotous celebration of Afro Carribean culture and enjoy myself throughly. In the same way that Black Americans have no problem indulging in the annual drink fest that is St Patrick's day.

In terms of sport, most immigrants will bring their own sporting cultures to this country. The Indians and Pakistanis for example will bolster the numbers playing cricket here. That's their game. There are millions of Indians/Pakistanis in England. Name one person of that ethnicity playing football in the premier league. Name one playing in the Coca Cola league. Neither can I.

Indians don't do soccer (Why? Cause every time they get a corner they open a shop. Nya ha ha ha ha. Sorry mods couldn't resist it).

There are several, however, who have played cricket for England (Ramprakash, Butcher) and one who has captained the team with some distinction Nasser Hussain.

So ethnic diversity does not have to be divisive or coercive. Liek Your man Trevor Phillips who wants to focus on a sense of britishness. Fine. But what does being British mean? What's a standard British meal nowadays?

That would be a good one actually. How many British people under the age of 50 have ever eaten jellied eels or eel pie?

And how many of the same vintage have never been for an Indian curry?

It's the great British cuisine of today.

article6

Snickers Man wrote:

Even the Irish Times,notwithstanding the regular contributions of Mr O'Toole, gives over regular polemical space to the likes of Mark Steyn, John Waters and Kevin Myers.

The correct response to the claim "The Irish Times is Leftist" is not "But they employ three non-Leftist journalists".

Snickers Man

article6 wrote:

The correct response to the claim "The Irish Times is Leftist" is not "But they employ three non-Leftist journalists".

But those 'three non-leftist journalists' comprise the core of the leader-writing polemical team.

These guys do precious little reporting, and if they do it's usually discredited within a very short time. The Times gives them the run of the opinion columns with regular abandon.Myers usually gets to promulgate his views that we were much more heroic when our working class were used as cannon fodder for the empire's armies four days a week in An Irishman's Diary.

Steyn has his usual Monday morning slot to make arguments based on facts that turn out not to be facts at all. Like the one about the unemployed German woman who was told that she would lose her benefit if she did not take a vacancy in a State-licenced brothel. Turned out to be completely untrue.

And Waters also gets his weekly run out to complain how horrible women have become since they got the vote.

As opposed to that, O'Toole normally gets into the opinion columns about once a week. So does Vincent Browne, and he's swung backwards and forwards so often his left hand doesn't know what his right is doing.

Doctor Benway

Also Breda O'Brien, Steven King, Martin Mansergh.

Oh, and Geraldine Kennedy.

Hardly a vanguardist Marxist sect.

DadaKopf

I saw the last few minutes of the debate. Dooley at it again, acting like an arrogant, right-wing buffoon on helium.

I was lectured by him in UCD a few years ago. One of the best lecturers I've ever had, actually. The irony is that he lectured in postmodern Continental philosophy. Derrida, Foucault, Baudrillard. You know, anti-ideological leftists. All the same, he was officially stationed in some University of Maynooth ecumenics department.

Next I knew, there he was, on Pat Kenny, being bruised left, right and centre by Robert Fisk. Then I turn on the TV and there he is again, screeching and flailing his rubbery arms and wobbley head at Fintan. It was like being in a lecture all over again! In lectures, he spent most of his time pacing across the stage, screeching, wildly gesticulating, talking to walls, with his nose millimetres from the surface.

But he explained everything as if he believed it. You know, a fairly learned, smart dude.

Now he's an right-wing, reactionary bigot with no sensible arguments, just typical right wing platitudes and non sequitrs.

I haven't read one of his article yet. The last one I heard he wrote was about intellectual life in UCD, where he, essentially, in a coded way, slagged off his former colleagues who didn't like him very much.

grumpytrousers

DadaKopf wrote:

I haven't read one of his article yet. The last one I heard he wrote was about intellectual life in UCD, where he, essentially, in a coded way, slagged off his former colleagues who didn't like him very much.

Think I read that one; he bemoaned the fact that Irish Universities were churning out young folk who only appreciated lefties like Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky and...um...dunno. Found meself yelling c*nt so much while reading it that I gave up...

Snickers Man

The Phoenix (OK there's a publication that has a decidedly iconoclastic left wing slant) puts it very well in a profile about another Sindo groupy Gwen Halley.

'Halley, much like Brendan O'Connor....belongs to that subset of young Irish media types who believe that liberal bashing,right wing rhetoric is the height of anti-establishment cool.'

The 'chattering classes' of the next decade, one suspects.

simu

DadaKopf wrote:

I haven't read one of his article yet. The last one I heard he wrote was about intellectual life in UCD, where he, essentially, in a coded way, slagged off his former colleagues who didn't like him very much.

Ah, I saw that article but only now do I realise that was the same guy as the one who was on the Late Late. Twas an extremely strange article... he seemed to worry that today's students had no one to tell them what to think iirc. !

Well, hope he doesn't become some sort of RTÉ regular - he may be entertaining to watch but it gets boring very fast.

Snickers Man

RTE set me up.

They put me up against somebody clever! Not fair!

They gave me so much rope that I hanged myself! The bastards!!!

His main claim is that Kenny's opening question was 'Is Ireland becoming an Islamic state' which was not what he understood that he was being asked to debate.

That's funny. I seem to remember him raising that particular spectre by referring to polls of European muslims who said they favoured Sharia law being imposed in their countries of residence.

And he made the point htat the Canadian was a hindu, not a muslim, but then that was pretty clear to most people. certainly elsewhere in this thread.

But he gets to use his Sindo column to slag off the forum in which he made a complete twat of himself, and not for the first time.

So he was asked tough questions by the presenter. Isn't that what real journalists are supposed to do? Guy's a buffoon.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

simu

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Well, of course the Ó Hailpíns are integrated - their father is Irish so it was a lot easier for them.

As for the woman covered from head to toe - well, how do you know that she's not as integrated in her own way as anyone else? You can't make assumptions like that.

Attacking visible signs that may or may not be related to fundamentalism is a waste of time imo. Now, certainly, if we were to find out that some radical Muslin cleric was advocating the destruction of Western society/whatever in a mosque in Ireland, it would be worrying but tbh, most Muslims who live here seem to want to live peacefully and there's no reason to fear them. In fact, I don't get at all why people see Islam as such a threat. You don't judge all Christians by the most extreme, fundamentalist version of Christianity so why would you for Islam?

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

simu

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Well, the type of discrimination you speak of in regards to Muslim women is happening at a personal rather than a legal level so I don't see what can be done about it apart from "live and let live". You can't try to get such women to become feminists or whatever overnight - they'll feel it's being forced on them. But they might absorb some elements of it by living in Ireland and their kids will probably have a more liberal mindset having grown up here.

I suppose it's simply a different viewpoint, I see the whole thing as quite a slippery slope. Rightly or wrongly, but the precedent from Europe and the UK is that it is a slippery slope, meanwhile in the US Muslims see themselves as Muslim-Americans, which is a far preferable situation.

Well, yes. I think it would be best if Muslims who are settled here saw themselves as Irish/Muslim/whatever other country and if they felt as Irish as anyone else. Banning burkas and so on would probably just alienate such people from the idea of being Irish, though.

What happens a lot with the debate over Islam is that people are reinforcing the beliefs they are trying to eradicate. It's tricky stuff.