That Article in the Programme last night!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NorthoftheLee

Coming out with stupid incorrect comments and generalisations of people is ignorant. Having an opinion is not. :rolleyes:

---

How can anyone honestly believe that sole responsibility for this can lie with the Police?
At your age you'd think you'd have more sense.
No one stood at the gates with sticks and beat people into the ground.
People pushed as they always do.
We've all been in situations like this.

It's all behind us now and the grounds in Britain are some of the best in the world. It's all about moving on.

You've made all of this out of a comment in an article.
I think you need to look at why you feel you need to be offended by this.

peadar.. leave it lie for fuxake
an independant enquiry conducted found the police at fault
96 innocent people watching a football match died

an article in the programme made reference to this tragedy in a flippant way.. its not acceptable and should be left at that. theres no need for you to start questioning why people feel the need to feel offended by this.. any decent football fan recognises what happened was an avoidable tragedy and would have respect for the people who died.

btw.. i would have thought that your 'It's all about moving on' theory would have included not insulting deceased innocent people.. would it not have been easier to just say nothing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by one_bounce

btw.. i would have thought that your 'It's all about moving on' theory would have included not insulting deceased innocent people.. would it not have been easier to just say nothing?

---

I'm not instulting them.
It's the people that are still alive who, as Tory MP Boris Johnson rightly pointed out in my opinin, "wallow" in their "victim status."

I don't really have any interest participating further in this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peadar

I'm not instulting them.
It's the people that are still alive who, as Tory MP Boris Johnson rightly pointed out in my opinin, "wallow" in their "victim status."

I don't really have any interest participating further in this.

---

neither do i.. but the people who are still alive and 'wallowing in their victim status' are the people who lost family and friends that day, and have not seen justice. i cant believe that if you lost somebody in similar circumstances and no justice had been served, that you would be happy to just give up the 'wallowing' and feeling sorry for yourself and forget it even happened because theres better grounds now

people are not asking you to agree with them..they are just asking you to have some respect

Ok, I've left this run till now to make sure all the grievances got an airing.

The article in question is fairly sweeping in nature (3,000 BC to present day) and I don't think any insult was intended on the author's part, to be fair. The whole thing was light hearted in nature, end of story.

I can see now, however, how some people read the reference about Hillsborough and took it up the way they did. I can only repeat this was not the intention and I apologise if those people have been genuinely offended by it.

I can point out that over 1,000 copies were printed and perhaps more than that number got around to reading it: only a handful appear to have been upset by the content.

Perhaps if I hadn't been under such pressure time-wise with that particular issue I might have taken a different interpretation and I might have edited it out. On my reading of it I took it a different way, and I think that's still possible to do if you put it in the whole context of the piece, rather than selecting the sentence as a statement of some kind and equating it to some kind of journalistic crime (almost). I think it was quite a good article, and I think the historic comparisons being made have been misinterpreted just a bit...

You can challenge my position on my interpretation of it if you like and the decision to let it run in the programme. However, I am of the opinion that it's possible to have a different interpretation of the piece, even of the actual ('offending') line. I have apologised if anyone has been really upset by it.

I have no intention of saying anything else on the matter. It's a programme article at the end of the day, one sentence of which caused a ripple of resentment to a handful of readers. It was not a 3,000-word assault on the victims of Hillsborough or their familes...

Oh, and of course, I apologise to non-transvestite Scots everywhere, Jim Smith. ;)

Donie