Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - seafoid

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 1498
1
General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: Today at 06:32:26 PM »
Raidio ná Gaeltachta?

Ó am go h-am ar fud na tíre.
Nuacht an 7n Domhnach seo caite mar shampla

2
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: Today at 05:34:12 PM »
Lynch, your exact words were:

“If you are a kaperneck fan , well he painted himself into that corner and I have no sympathy for him for bringing that into American football sporting arenas.”

(My emphasis.)

You expect us to believe that the word “that” in your statement refers to something other than politics? Or maybe you’re now going to use some contorted logic to suggest that the BLM movement is not political. Whatever.

Don’t insult our intelligence. We all know you weren’t talking about the weather.

Sport has always been political. Kaperneck is not the first person to use a sporting platform to make a political point.
No offense but you are certainly pushing the boundaries of cyber bullying here.
Thrusting your opinions down someone's throat and telling them what they mean


My issue with kaperneck and what he did at no stage says political.
It was his actions of starting off a protest within a sporting arena that annoyed me. He could have protested outside city hall during the week, but to bring any protest into sports is wrong.  Whether the protest is personal pay related , gay rights, anti carbon emissions, anti abortion, anti Mexican wall,  anti patriots/brady/deflategate persecution or anti cyber bullying - to highlight and conduct an act in this arena is way wrong.
It was the act of bringing the game into disrepute I was referring to.
So feel free to apologise.. but like most bullying behaviour, I suspect one will be lacking.
Should Jessie Owens have done it outside City Hall? Do you think that would have the same effect?
are u comparing kapernick to Jesse Owens get a grip I suppose Jussie Smollett is a modern day mlk
Smollet is like a human version of Brexit and the trump election win

I have to correct you

Smollet is the epitome of the democrat movement. Arrogance, stupidity with a total disregard for the truth and the consequences of his actions.

The Social Justice Warrior he claimed to be was all an act to grab more for himself and virtue signal at the same time as demonizing people who dare show you up as frauds.

It's just like dealing with a lot of you bucks on this board.
All you seem to do is act the MAGA

3
General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: Today at 05:33:02 PM »
Jasus Seaf you must think we're all retired or are Senior managers here ;D
There is way too much news these days
There is chaos everywhere

It's the end of the economic system.

I remember as a child hearing about McDermotts Department Store in Castlerea. It was fabulous in the 60s
according to everyone who spoke about it. 
It collapsed sometime in the late 70s when the last economic system collapsed

It’s a good job you copy and paste all of that news in case we miss it!! What do you do for a living?? You seem to have serious time on your hands.

I advise companies on how to get through
the next crash and I do stuff on Raidio ná Gaeltachta

You never know who might be interested on the board.
Financial Risk affects everyone .

4
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: Today at 02:18:24 PM »
Lynch, your exact words were:

“If you are a kaperneck fan , well he painted himself into that corner and I have no sympathy for him for bringing that into American football sporting arenas.”

(My emphasis.)

You expect us to believe that the word “that” in your statement refers to something other than politics? Or maybe you’re now going to use some contorted logic to suggest that the BLM movement is not political. Whatever.

Don’t insult our intelligence. We all know you weren’t talking about the weather.

Sport has always been political. Kaperneck is not the first person to use a sporting platform to make a political point.
No offense but you are certainly pushing the boundaries of cyber bullying here.
Thrusting your opinions down someone's throat and telling them what they mean


My issue with kaperneck and what he did at no stage says political.
It was his actions of starting off a protest within a sporting arena that annoyed me. He could have protested outside city hall during the week, but to bring any protest into sports is wrong.  Whether the protest is personal pay related , gay rights, anti carbon emissions, anti abortion, anti Mexican wall,  anti patriots/brady/deflategate persecution or anti cyber bullying - to highlight and conduct an act in this arena is way wrong.
It was the act of bringing the game into disrepute I was referring to.
So feel free to apologise.. but like most bullying behaviour, I suspect one will be lacking.
Should Jessie Owens have done it outside City Hall? Do you think that would have the same effect?
are u comparing kapernick to Jesse Owens get a grip I suppose Jussie Smollett is a modern day mlk
Smollet is like a human version of Brexit and the trump election win


5
General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: Today at 01:52:15 PM »
Jasus Seaf you must think we're all retired or are Senior managers here ;D
There is way too much news these days
There is chaos everywhere

It's the end of the economic system.

I remember as a child hearing about McDermotts Department Store in Castlerea. It was fabulous in the 60s
according to everyone who spoke about it. 
It collapsed sometime in the late 70s when the last economic system collapsed

6
GAA Discussion / Re: NFL Division 1 2019 Dubs again?
« on: Today at 01:50:27 PM »
Massive game for Cavan on Sunday. If we are to have any chink of light to escape relegation we have to do what we have really struggled to do in the last number of years and beat Roscommon. Good news is Gerry Smith is likely to play some part, probably the best player on any of those U21 teams but who hasnt really had a consistent run at senior. Gearoid McKiernan and Caoimhin O Reilly back training too after injury. We've put in respectable enough performances for 30 mins in each of our 1st 3 matches, now its time to really go for it. I hope it is in them to do that.
And you have the full attention of the manager for this first time

7
General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: Today at 10:23:58 AM »

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/07/no-deal-brexit-medieval-siege-eu-britain-industries

A no-deal Brexit won’t result in a siege. The EU will be more clinical than that

Tom Kibasi


 
Talk of rotting food at Calais is hysterical: instead, no deal would see the EU calmly dismantle Britain’s industries over time


One of the most striking features of the ongoing Brexit shambles is the consistent failure of Britain’s political class to correctly assess the consequences of their decisions or the likely response from EU member states or institutions. So it is with the prospect of a no-deal Brexit.

With every passing week, new heights of hysteria are reached about the impact of crashing out of the bloc. Politicians and the media have embraced the aesthetic of the disaster movie, outlining all the most vivid ways in which our economy and society will fall to pieces after exit day in an imagined dystopia.

The government amplifies rather than dampens the threat in the hope that fear will bring MPs from both main parties into acquiescing to the prime minister’s Brexit deal. And the EU, keen to assist the government in getting the deal through parliament, does little to lower the temperature. But almost all of the fear-mongering is wrong.

  The hysteria needs to stop and the sobering reality of the scale of the stakes for the future must be better understood
 

In truth, the short-term impact of a no-deal Brexit would be not nearly as bad as predicted, but the long-term impact will be much worse than feared. Why? Because the British political class still fails to understand how the EU will respond to the crisis.

In a no-deal Brexit, the EU will not place the UK under some medieval siege; there won’t be trucks filled with rotting food in Calais or shortages of medicines in pharmacies. Planes will continue to fly, though British travellers would face longer queues at borders (yet still enjoy visa-free travel). A thin agreement – covering areas from aviation to contract continuity – would be quickly concluded.

Most households would feel the impact not through shortages but through rising prices, the result of a rapid weakening in sterling driving up the cost of imports. Living standards that have barely improved for more than a decade would get noticeably worse. But 3,500 troops are not going to be deployed to the streets.

Instead, the EU’s response to a no deal will be strategic: opening up advantage, sector by sector, calmly and patiently dismantling the UK’s leading industries over the course of a decade. They will eat the elephant one bite at a time. The problem with abandoning the rules of the international order is that you no longer enjoy their protection.

A no-deal Brexit would hand the EU enormous power: it would decide how and when to introduce new frictions between the UK and the single market, giving sufficient time for firms like Airbus, Nissan or AstraZeneca to relocate production. As recent decisions have demonstrated, even seemingly fixed capital investment is more mobile than many Brexiters imagine.

The EU would set out a timeline over which it would introduce compliance and rules of origin checks on the UK’s most competitive exporting sectors. It is not hard to imagine checks on automotive parts from 2021, pharmaceuticals from 2022 and aerospace from 2023, alongside constantly shifting sands of equivalence for financial services. This would allow firms an orderly departure from the UK to the single market. It will be a steady drift away from the UK, not an avalanche. Moreover, the absence of any agreement would mean lasting uncertainty that would deter future investment. The UK is particularly exposed in this regard: our serious lack of competitiveness is demonstrated by persistently large trade deficits. This means the UK is heavily reliant on foreign investment – the “kindness of strangers” – which would likely collapse. It is not hard to imagine a future government going cap in hand to the IMF for a bailout.

The Brexit fantasists’ riposte is that the Europeans have as much to lose since the UK is an important export market and we run a large trade deficit with the single market. But one of the legacies of Thatcher’s deindustrialisation is that the UK lacks the industrial base to switch from foreign to domestic production. It simply no longer exists, thanks to the 1980s shock therapy of the very same disaster capitalists that now champion no-deal.

Those same Brexiters who have marched from failure to failure with no loss of enthusiasm still bizarrely believe that the UK could pocket the £39bn divorce bill while pursuing trade deals around the world. Yet the EU would, calmly and rationally, place tariffs on UK trade until it had collected what it is owed. And the damage to trade with the single market could not be replaced by new trade deals – in addition to the EU27, the UK has the benefits of trade deals with 40 other countries through the EU, all of which would evaporate overnight in no deal. That requires 67 deals to be signed just to stand still.

Yet it is for these reasons that no deal remains the least likely outcome, its probability in the single digits. What began as a political hoax is now affecting real investment decisions in the economy, as Nissan’s recent decision has shown. The hysteria needs to stop and the sobering reality of the scale of the stakes for the UK’s future prosperity must be better understood. It is a damning indictment and a severe dereliction of duty that such a calamity as a no-deal Brexit is a possibility, no matter how unlikely. It’s time to rule out no deal, once and for all.

8
General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: Today at 09:46:02 AM »
The all Europe senior hurling final

https://www.ft.com/content/738a995a-35ca-11e9-bd3a-8b2a211d90d5

   How no-deal sets the stage for Brexit’s biggest negotiations
      
      
               EU goal will be to make UK pay its €45bn bill and agree backstop

               Alex Barker in Brussels

If Britain leaves the EU without a deal next month, Europe’s Brexit negotiators will not end talks but reset their clocks to a new cliff-edge date: April 18.After 20 days of likely disorder at ports, supermarkets and borders, the deadline will be Britain’s chance to avoid a more lasting rupture with its biggest trading partner — if it can stomach the price. By April 18, according to European Commission contingency plans, Britain must confirm whether to make around €7bn of net contributions to the EU’s budget for 2019. The first payments, which require House of Commons approval, are scheduled for April 30; EU negotiators say missing them will “ruin” relations.The budget ultimatum, cast by Brussels as a generous offer to provide continuity for Britain after the country’s scheduled March 29 departure, is one of the most striking examples of the diplomatic crunch that looms in the immediate aftermath of a no-deal exit.Driving the EU side will be a new aim: making Britain meet its withdrawal treaty obligations, including the €45bn budget bill and backstop arrangements to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, even though the treaty itself will have perished. As a result, a no-deal exit would kick off the most fast-paced and consequential period of negotiations since the Brexit referendum in 2016. “This is when it all shakes out,” said one senior EU diplomat closely involved in Brexit.In the white-heat of a traumatic break with four decades of shared sovereignty, the two sides will confront decisions that will frame relations for years to come. The choices made in the space of a few weeks may determine whether a no-deal Brexit becomes a hostile divorce or a more managed break that keeps a path to reconciliation open.

“Here in Berlin, people are starting to realise that no-deal Brexit is not an event in itself but a new phase of the process,” said Nicolai von Ondarza of the German Institute for International and Security Studies. “It will not mean the breakdown of negotiations but a different form of negotiation.”No-deal Brexit threat focusing minds, says Philip HammondEU sets its deadlines and demandsA “managed no-deal” scenario has long been derided by the EU, in part to stop Brexiters from claiming that the benefits of the Britain’s exit treaty could be replicated through “mini-deals” after Brexit that have fewer downsides. “If there is a no deal there is no more discussion. There is no more negotiation. It is over,” said Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, last year. “Each side will take its own unilateral contingency measures.”But contingency plans issued by the commission since December tell a different story about the type of interaction imagined after Brexit — if the politics will bear it. There will be no overarching UK-EU treaty, nor the soft landing of a full transition, as established by Theresa May’s draft withdrawal treaty. But through “unilateral” arrangements it has already put in place for no-deal, Brussels has set up a series of deadlines and demands — covering areas ranging from fish and money to flying rights — that will inevitably require dialogue with London.“The Brits will be back to the negotiating table within weeks,” said one senior EU figure directly involved in handling Brexit. “We will say, yes, by all means let’s discuss the future. First, here is the backstop and the financial settlement.”Three strands to the talksSeen from the EU, talks would fall into three related strands. First are areas such as fisheries and money, where the EU as demander wants the UK to continue existing arrangements so that divisive fights between the remaining 27 EU states are avoided. Here self-interest prevails. For instance, Brussels’ contingency proposals on fisheries push the EU’s no-deal principles to their limit in a bid to retain access to UK waters that fishermen in France, the Netherlands and Belgium depend on. The draft plans call on the UK to maintain existing agreements for 2019 and allow member states to negotiate swaps of fishing quotas. These swaps, which would then be approved by the commission, are exactly the kind of mini-deals that the EU has long said would be banned.

A second area covers fundamental concerns — such as the maintenance of peace in Northern Ireland, financial stability in markets, and public health — in which co-operation may be essential, even if UK-EU relations badly sour. One senior EU official said that issues such as the Irish border were things that “both sides will need to sit together and discuss”, even in the weeks before a no-deal exit. “There will be pragmatic solutions found,” the negotiator said. One EU ambassador said talks, at an informal level, had already started. Leo Varadkar, the Irish premier, maintains that the ultimate solutions will mirror the backstop plan, in which at least Northern Ireland would remain under the EU’s customs union and regulatory regime — a measure loathed by Eurosceptics and Mrs May’s allies in Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist party.“I don’t think that we’ll get to anything very different to the agreement . . . even if that involves a period of uncertainty after 29 March,” Mr Varadkar said this week.

Managing Britain as a ‘third country’

The final big area of concern is the wider economy, and how to manage Britain suddenly becoming a “third country”. Brussels’ aim is to mitigate the worst effects of a break-up and give European businesses time to adapt. But at the same time it wants to show that EU membership has irreplaceable benefits, and keep pressure on the UK to yield on fish and financial payments. The Commission’s contingency plans temporarily relax laws for around a year — for example extending visa-free travel rights and allowing airlines to maintain basic point-to-point flight schedules with Britain — so as long as the steps are “reciprocated” by London. The hitch comes if Britain does not reciprocate, or says it will only do so if access arrangements are improved in one or more sectors. In the past the EU has only taken such “equivalence” decisions — which unilaterally grant market access rights to foreign companies — after having held extensive exchanges with third country governments. The difference with a no-deal Brexit would be the sheer number of areas covered at pace, against the backdrop of a legal revolution.

EU’s view of its bargaining power

The EU sees its bargaining power as coming from managing the implementation of rules that can cause huge disruption to trade — such as customs checks or providing authorisations. The challenge is taking advantage of that leverage that without doing further harm to EU interests. The EU has particular sway in the area of agricultural trade. UK exports face 100 per cent checks under EU law after Brexit. But, for this point even to be reached, Brussels must first authorise the UK as “competent” to export to the EU — a decision that one senior EU diplomat noted might take a day or “maybe a lot longer”, depending on the state of relations. Michael Gove, Britain’s environment secretary, admitted to farmers this week that, by holding back on this authorisation decision, the EU could completely halt Britain’s sales of beef, sheep meat and dairy to the bloc.

“As things stand, just six weeks before we are due to leave, the EU still have not listed the UK as a full third country in the event of no deal being concluded,” Mr Gove said. “That means as I speak that there is no absolute guarantee that we would be able to continue to export food to the EU.” Capitalising on this bargaining power is a high risk strategy for the EU. Britain could impose tariffs, as Mr Gove suggested this week, or indeed ban EU imports, a move that would hit Ireland particularly hard.

But some in Brussels see Britain having few options but to lower trade barriers if it wants to avoid food shortages. “The UK has no incentive whatsoever unless they want empty shelves,” said one official, who predicted some EU states would make fishing rights in UK waters a condition for granting market access to UK farmers.Shifts in British politics difficult to predictCalculations on the balance of power in a no-deal scenario depend heavily on one factor: they assume the UK government will have the political leeway and authority to do deals. While some EU negotiators are confident the UK will have little choice but to co-operate, because of the economic hit in a no-deal scenario, some member states are more unsure. “How exactly is British politics going to turn around after no deal and agree to the backstop that was the cause of them crashing out? I don’t understand,” said one senior official overseeing Brexit for an EU government. Another senior EU diplomat in close touch with Downing Street over Brexit speculated that, when the UK’s exit from the bloc becomes a reality, it will be impossible to predict shifts in British politics, whether because of resignations or elections. “I cannot imagine a hard Brexit will mean business as usual in British politics,” the adviser said. “Something has to happen.”

10
Hurling Discussion / Re: Limerick Hurling - A millionaires playground.
« on: February 21, 2019, 03:41:50 PM »
I see Eamon O'Shea is back with the Tipperary hurling setup

plenty of money being spent there too
Last year was a catastrophe for Tipp. They hadn't even the hay saved and they were out 

11
GAA Discussion / Re: Serious financial irregularities in Galway
« on: February 21, 2019, 03:22:16 PM »
That's what happens when a county board doesn't employ a full time person to look after finances and day to day matters.
Not every county can afford to hire a commercial manager to develop the 'brand'
The brand was the victim of a wild pull on Sunday

 Sutcliffe was fortunate to escape with a yellow after a rash pull across Joe Canning in front of an outraged crowd in the stand. Canning was hobbling but maintained a perfect free-taking statistic as Galway re-asserted their control

12
GAA Discussion / Re: Serious financial irregularities in Galway
« on: February 21, 2019, 03:20:10 PM »
https://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/rotten-to-the-core-treasurer-hits-out-over-state-of-galways-gaa-finances-37635950.html

45k in expenses, sure that would of paid for at least 1 full time coach.

I wonder is there any update on this issue?

It would have paid for an infinite number of haves

13
Monaghan had a great first day against the Dubs but didn't follow it up
Hard to know how bad Tyrone are. They could easily turn up the next day. 
And sure it's only the league.

14
General discussion / Re: Missing Posters
« on: February 21, 2019, 10:28:58 AM »
Syferus and his pitchfork not about ?
He may have discovered women

15
General discussion / Re: Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.
« on: February 21, 2019, 10:23:59 AM »
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/newton-emerson-most-dublin-politicians-have-no-understanding-of-northern-ireland-1.3800328

Newton Emerson: Most Dublin politicians have no understanding of Northern Ireland
Southerners can be as bad as the British when it comes to grasping North’s new reality
about 5 hours ago
 
Newton Emerson

9

 
Fianna Fáil Senator Mark Daly commissioned a poll in which 500 people in the Republic were told Northern Ireland requires no subsidy and then asked if they would like to see a united Ireland, to which 73 per cent said yes.
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to Email AppShare to LinkedInShare to PinterestShare to RedditShare to WhatsApp
   
 
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to Email AppShare to LinkedInShare to PinterestShare to RedditShare to WhatsApp
 
Sympathy is due to Northern nationalists after the latest report from Fianna Fáil Senator Mark Daly. Last July, while still a member of the joint Oireachtas committee on the Belfast Agreement, Daly produced what he grandly titled “research” claiming Northern Ireland’s £10 billion annual subsidy is an accounting mistake and the actual figure is zero. This claim was so preposterous even Sinn Féin was reluctant to cite it.

Last November, Daly commissioned a poll in which 500 people in the Republic were told Northern Ireland requires no subsidy then asked if they would like to see a united Ireland, to which 73 per cent said yes.
Now the Senator has produced another report, again grandly titled “research”, claiming a hard Border and a “rushed border poll” are both equally certain to provoke violence and the only way to avoid this is to develop a shared Northern Ireland identity and society through, first and foremost, integrated education.
Taken together, Daly’s efforts constitute a near parody of Northern nationalism’s cynicism about Southern commitment to unification: namely, that a united Ireland is a great idea as long as it costs nothing and Northerners sort out all their differences before anyone even thinks of holding a vote on it.

Senator Daly is not alone in making this painfully apparent. Statements on Brexit and a border poll from the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the leadership of Fianna Fáil have all conveyed exactly the same message in only slightly less gauche terms. It is a Free State prayer of St Augustine: Lord make me whole, but not yet.

British politicians have been widely derided since the EU referendum for not understanding Northern Ireland. Most Dublin politicians are no better. They may be aware of the sea-change in nationalist attitudes over the past two years but they have barely grasped the thinking behind it.

Blue Billywig Video PlayerThe peace process presented nationalists with a political quandary. If Northern Ireland ceased to be a “failed entity”, that might make a united Ireland less pressing. Conversely, if nationalists declined to throw themselves wholeheartedly into making Northern Ireland work, its failure could be seen as their fault and call their commitment to peace into question.
•   Newton Emerson: Can the DUP sell its Brexit backstop climbdown?
•   Newton Emerson: Irish and EU must stop ridiculing Border technology
•   Newton Emerson: Can Irish America throw a spanner in the works of Brexit?
 
BREXIT: The Facts
Read them here
In the years after the 2007 St Andrew’s Agreement this trap appeared to have been sprung. The nationalist share of the vote declined steadily as DUP-Sinn Féin government bedded in.
People spoke more openly of a Northern Ireland identity, undeterred by nationalist complaints that it was a unionist contrivance or a British plot. In retrospect, the low point occurred in 2013, when US president Barack Obama gave a speech in Belfast calling for integrated education and comparing the religious division of children to the racially segregated schools of pre-civil rights America.
United Ireland

It was clear from his speech that, like Daly, Obama favoured a united Ireland and
saw the building of a united Northern Ireland as its essential prerequisite. However, nationalists were so aghast the US consulate in Belfast was forced to issue a clarification that the president was not opposed to Catholic schools.
For many Catholics, those schools are the foundation of their distinct cultural Irishness. To deny them that within Northern Ireland would be enforced assimilation.
In my opinion, which I can apparently call research, nationalists are still mistaken
Obama made the same point as late as April 2016, in a speech in London, when he also referred to “forging a new identity that is about being from Northern Ireland.”

The Brexit vote two months later, and the RHI scandal that quickly followed, changed everything. Nationalists now see themselves as freed from the trap – they are under no obligation to make Northern Ireland work if unionists and the British government have broken it.

This has moved us beyond the assumption, still evident in Dublin, that everything can go back to normal if a hard Border is avoided. The extent of nationalist relief at their political absolution should not be underestimated.
Peaceful future
In my opinion, which I can apparently call research, nationalists are still mistaken. A functioning Northern Ireland, including devolution, remains essential for a peaceful future either within the UK or for the transition to a united Ireland.

However, this case can no longer be made with the traditional platitudes emanating from the Republic. Fresh thinking is required, along with new intervention from the British and Irish governments. Nationalists will settle for nothing less.
Among the most challenging matters to consider is whether we are approaching the point where a border poll might assist stability, or at least do more good than harm.
Nationalism is going for broke with a headcount vision of unity, and has convinced itself amid the Brexit hysteria that it can win. It cannot – its vote in both elections since the EU referendum was 42 per cent. Unionism last polled 49 per cent.
Establishing that baseline could be necessary, not to defeat nationalism but to demonstrate to unionists and nationalists how finely balanced both communities are, and why Northern Ireland must be shared to secure anyone’s constitutional aspiration.


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 1498