Get ready to wave them flegs - Lily Windsor's coming

[Evil Genius]

great post by Aoise - I fully agree with all of that, usual round the houses daft reply from evil myles though doesnt detract from its accuracy or personal opinion!

"Round the houses"?
I made a number of specific responses to the points she was trying to make, all backed up with links/sources/evidence. Your attempt to back her up might carry a shred of credibility if you had actually tried to respond in the same vein, rather than repeating your usual tack of "It's good/bad/whatever because I say it is".
Then again, seeing as you're the last poster on here who's still labouring under the delusion that I am also Myles naGopaleen, I'd be pretty surprised if you suddenly started to display judgement, reasoning or deduction etc in your posts.

There wont be any reunification while we have economic problems.

Seeing as the GFA has determined that it cannot happen until a majority of voters in NI agrees to it, the last realistic prospect of Irish unity disappeared completely along with the 20th Century.
The Republic's present economic crisis merely adds one more nail to the coffin. I don't know what age you are, but I'd be completely confident that it ain't gonna happen in your lifetime or mine.
In fact, rather than dreaming as you and Aoise do, that the Queen's visit is some sort of precursor to Irish unity etc, one might just as easily characterise it as final realisation and acceptance by the Republic that the Union of GB and NI, with Her Majesty as Head of State, is here to stay.
If so (and I personally wouldn't like to overstate its significance), then it is a welcome move in normalising relations between the two neighbouring countries (imo).

I dont actually care whether the queen comes or not

Really?
Despite the visit being some sort of first step towards softening us all up to the prospect of Irish unity etc?

and I dont think that she can be held accountable for the actions of british soldiers because she is head of the armed forces any more than we can hold her accountable for child abuse at the hands of church of england ministers just because she is head of the COE.

Actually the Archbishop of Canterbury is the head ("Primate") of the CoE. The Queen is "Defender of the Faith", a now largely honorary title first conferred upon her predecessor, Henry VIII, by Pope Leo X.

But, I am wary/worried about the cost for security for both her and obama. I dont think that there will be any significant increase in tourism returns to cover the cost of this security.
Lets face it, if you were not Irish, would you come here given the crap weather, expemsive food and drink and also now hearing that there are bombs going off all over the country (this is what foreigners used to think). I wouldnt.

I might have been inclined to agree with you (for once!), until I saw the extent of the attention* and publicity etc which the forthcoming Royal Wedding is bringing to the UK, from all over the world.


* - Don't quite understand it, myself, but if it gains us an extra Bank Holiday etc, then I'm all for it!

[AZOffaly]

Hardy, this term of endearment is class. I'm going to appropriate it for my own use

' twonk '

[Nally Stand]

Why? I just asked you which of those two options I should go with?

The first is what I would usually do, but then, the second is the responses you gave when bananaman asked you a question; so maybe you would prefer to be answered in the same way you answer people?

Too late, we already have had the benefit of your moral authority ruling on the subject. You can't turn around and play me having lectured me on being me.

When I am me. You bash me.

But when you are me you don't bash you.

Now have a word with yourself.

When was I you? I just asked if I SHOULD be you, by answering your Obama question with personal abuse rather than a serious answer. Like you did when Bananaman asked his question.

So....which option??

Ah I dunno. I'll not use either for now. I think I'll engage in sensible discussion on your question on Obama's visit if you prove you can engage in sensible debate with Bananaman (i.e. no name calling!!) I'd hate to answer your question on Obama only to be told I'm uneducated or something. So I'll go away and get better educated, and maybe when I get back, you or Abbeysider might have engaged in an actual discussion with Bananaman without using personal abuse in place of answering his questions.

[Banana Man]

so lads have you had enough time to get over the name calling and personal abuse and back up your ''moronic'' claims....

[muppet]

Why? I just asked you which of those two options I should go with?

The first is what I would usually do, but then, the second is the responses you gave when bananaman asked you a question; so maybe you would prefer to be answered in the same way you answer people?

Too late, we already have had the benefit of your moral authority ruling on the subject. You can't turn around and play me having lectured me on being me.

When I am me. You bash me.

But when you are me you don't bash you.

Now have a word with yourself.

When was I you? I just asked if I SHOULD be you, by answering your Obama question with personal abuse rather than a serious answer. Like you did when Bananaman asked his question.

So....which option??

Ah I dunno. I'll not use either for now. I think I'll engage in sensible discussion on your question on Obama's visit if you prove you can engage in sensible debate with Bananaman (i.e. no name calling!!) I'd hate to answer your question on Obama only to be told I'm uneducated or something. So I'll go away and get better educated, and maybe when I get back, you or Abbeysider might have engaged in an actual discussion with Bananaman without using personal abuse in place of answering his questions.

I suspect many posters here will see through the faux concern for the Garda budget.

If people have ideological reasons for not wanting President Obama to come they should state them or say nothing. If they pretend that they are more concerned about the Garda overtime Budget than the Garda trade union are, then expect they shouldn't expect a serious response.

[Hardy]

Hardy, this term of endearment is class. I'm going to appropriate it for my own use

' twonk '

With my compliments. It's royalty-free.

[muppet]

Hardy, this term of endearment is class. I'm going to appropriate it for my own use

' twonk '

With my compliments. It's royalty-free.

It fits perfectly.

[Jim_Murphy_74]

But, I am wary/worried about the cost for security for both her and obama. I dont think that there will be any significant increase in tourism returns to cover the cost of this security.
Lets face it, if you were not Irish, would you come here given the crap weather, expemsive food and drink and also now hearing that there are bombs going off all over the country (this is what foreigners used to think). I wouldnt.

I might have been inclined to agree with you (for once!), until I saw the extent of the attention* and publicity etc which the forthcoming Royal Wedding is bringing to the UK, from all over the world.


* - Don't quite understand it, myself, but if it gains us an extra Bank Holiday etc, then I'm all for it!

I guess the fact is that these visits garner a lot of television coverage in Britain and the U.S.  If one was to compare that to the cost of putting a Irish Tourist Board ad on these channels at the same time it would make interesting comparisons.  Sure you can't definitively quantify up front how many visitors you will get but hey isn't that always the issue with marketing?  But on balance if people look in and say hey, that place looks nice they might consider it as a holiday destination.....it's a win.

I would also balance some of the wilder estimations of cost.  I know that both visitors carry an extra security risk but are we going to ban all state visits or just set a threshold on possible security threat?

/Jim.

[Banana Man]

Why? I just asked you which of those two options I should go with?

The first is what I would usually do, but then, the second is the responses you gave when bananaman asked you a question; so maybe you would prefer to be answered in the same way you answer people?

Too late, we already have had the benefit of your moral authority ruling on the subject. You can't turn around and play me having lectured me on being me.

When I am me. You bash me.

But when you are me you don't bash you.

Now have a word with yourself.

When was I you? I just asked if I SHOULD be you, by answering your Obama question with personal abuse rather than a serious answer. Like you did when Bananaman asked his question.

So....which option??

Ah I dunno. I'll not use either for now. I think I'll engage in sensible discussion on your question on Obama's visit if you prove you can engage in sensible debate with Bananaman (i.e. no name calling!!) I'd hate to answer your question on Obama only to be told I'm uneducated or something. So I'll go away and get better educated, and maybe when I get back, you or Abbeysider might have engaged in an actual discussion with Bananaman without using personal abuse in place of answering his questions.

I suspect many posters here will see through the faux concern for the Garda budget.

If people have ideological reasons for not wanting President Obama to come they should state them or say nothing. If they pretend that they are more concerned about the Garda overtime Budget than the Garda trade union are, then expect they shouldn't expect a serious response.

i would love to know exactly what you are inferring? You appear to be drawing a conclusion that i have no love or time for Obama    Now i'm pulling my chair up in anticipation of why i don't have any time for the president of America, this should be good, obviously it's my track record on Obama ha ha - Are you for real?

You have just lose any crumbling remains of credibility with that absolutely ludicrous statement that i have ideological concerns over Obama - you are named well, you really are a muppet

[muppet]

i would love to know exactly what you are inferring? You appear to be drawing a conclusion that i have no love or time for Obama    Now i'm pulling my chair up in anticipation of why i don't have any time for the president of America, this should be good, obviously it's my track record on Obama ha ha - Are you for real?

You have just lose any crumbling remains of credibility with that absolutely ludicrous statement that i have ideological concerns over Obama - you are named well, you really are a muppet

I was giving you a little credit which now appears misguided. Jim pointed out the blatantly obvious answer to year earlier question.

The who's who of the Libyan 'conflct';

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23947

it's official, the world is a dark seedy place and you can take nothing at face value. The US are up to their neck in everything, talk about a modern day empire...

This is what had me thinking that.

[Banana Man]

i would love to know exactly what you are inferring? You appear to be drawing a conclusion that i have no love or time for Obama    Now i'm pulling my chair up in anticipation of why i don't have any time for the president of America, this should be good, obviously it's my track record on Obama ha ha - Are you for real?

You have just lose any crumbling remains of credibility with that absolutely ludicrous statement that i have ideological concerns over Obama - you are named well, you really are a muppet

I was giving you a little credit which now appears misguided. Jim pointed out the blatantly obvious answer to year earlier question.

The who's who of the Libyan 'conflct';

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23947

it's official, the world is a dark seedy place and you can take nothing at face value. The US are up to their neck in everything, talk about a modern day empire...

This is what had me thinking that.

Jim had a reasonable stab at my question and in it it still doesn't answer my question but at least he points out it is hard to quantify and compare to a marketing advert that tourism ireland would run, you had no response until you tried to piggyback of his, you showed no attempt to think for yourself except an inexcusable volley of personal abuse which says more about your limited education than mine

Furthermore as for my quote, that makes me laugh, you actually trawled through my posts until a month ago and took something that was said in an entirely different context if you read the whole thread and how i was commenting on the quoted article, furthermore where did i mention Obama??? talk about trying to scoring cheap points when you are in a corner, the entire concept of debate seems to escape you

[muppet]

i would love to know exactly what you are inferring? You appear to be drawing a conclusion that i have no love or time for Obama    Now i'm pulling my chair up in anticipation of why i don't have any time for the president of America, this should be good, obviously it's my track record on Obama ha ha - Are you for real?

You have just lose any crumbling remains of credibility with that absolutely ludicrous statement that i have ideological concerns over Obama - you are named well, you really are a muppet

I was giving you a little credit which now appears misguided. Jim pointed out the blatantly obvious answer to year earlier question.

The who's who of the Libyan 'conflct';

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23947

it's official, the world is a dark seedy place and you can take nothing at face value. The US are up to their neck in everything, talk about a modern day empire...

This is what had me thinking that.

Jim had a reasonable stab at my question and in it it still doesn't answer my question but at least he points out it is hard to quantify and compare to a marketing advert that tourism ireland would run, you had no response until you tried to piggyback of his, you showed no attempt to think for yourself except an inexcusable volley of personal abuse which says more about your limited education than mine

Furthermore as for my quote, that makes me laugh, you actually trawled through my posts until a month ago and took something that was said in an entirely different context if you read the whole thread and how i was commenting on the quoted article, furthermore where did i mention Obama??? talk about trying to scoring cheap points when you are in a corner, the entire concept of debate seems to escape you

I never said you had anything against Obama. You do however have an opinion on the USA a country of which he just happens to be President.

As for the tourism, it is so blatantly in front of your nose obvious that I'd guess every single person you ask would say the same thing. IT is so blatantly obvious that I credited you with having another agenda but it seems I was mistaken. You actually didn't see the benefit of Coast to Coast prime time news images of Obama in Ireland, not to mention the print media. Incredible.

[Banana Man]

i would love to know exactly what you are inferring? You appear to be drawing a conclusion that i have no love or time for Obama    Now i'm pulling my chair up in anticipation of why i don't have any time for the president of America, this should be good, obviously it's my track record on Obama ha ha - Are you for real?

You have just lose any crumbling remains of credibility with that absolutely ludicrous statement that i have ideological concerns over Obama - you are named well, you really are a muppet

I was giving you a little credit which now appears misguided. Jim pointed out the blatantly obvious answer to year earlier question.

The who's who of the Libyan 'conflct';

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23947

it's official, the world is a dark seedy place and you can take nothing at face value. The US are up to their neck in everything, talk about a modern day empire...

This is what had me thinking that.

Jim had a reasonable stab at my question and in it it still doesn't answer my question but at least he points out it is hard to quantify and compare to a marketing advert that tourism ireland would run, you had no response until you tried to piggyback of his, you showed no attempt to think for yourself except an inexcusable volley of personal abuse which says more about your limited education than mine

Furthermore as for my quote, that makes me laugh, you actually trawled through my posts until a month ago and took something that was said in an entirely different context if you read the whole thread and how i was commenting on the quoted article, furthermore where did i mention Obama??? talk about trying to scoring cheap points when you are in a corner, the entire concept of debate seems to escape you

I never said you had anything against Obama. You do however have an opinion on the USA a country of which he just happens to be President.

As for the tourism, it is so blatantly in front of your nose obvious that I'd guess every single person you ask would say the same thing. IT is so blatantly obvious that I credited you with having another agenda but it seems I was mistaken. You actually didn't see the benefit of Coast to Coast prime time news images of Obama in Ireland, not to mention the print media. Incredible.

don't try and backtrack, you had to wait for Jim to come on to even offer an argument, you stole his and now are trying to use it, when I and Nally both pushed you for a rationale to your persoanl abuse you couldn't do it

i think you will find you did say i had something against Obama, and i quote ''If people have ideological reasons for not wanting President Obama to come they should state them or say nothing''- you really are in knots now you muppet

[muppet]

don't try and backtrack, you had to wait for Jim to come on to even offer an argument, you stole his and now are trying to use it, when I and Nally both pushed you for a rationale to your persoanl abuse you couldn't do it

i think you will find you did say i had something against Obama, and i quote ''If people have ideological reasons for not wanting President Obama to come they should state them or say nothing''- you really are in knots now you muppet

Your argument is that you couldn't see the tourism potential of Obama in Ireland and you are now arguing that others couldn't see it either? Wow.

Your second point is even more embarrassing. Notice the word President. All the arguments against the Queen are on the basis of what she represents (Head of the British Army etc.), any argument against Obama would obviously be the same. Unless of course you can find someone who thinks he shouldn't come because he is a shite basketballer.

[Banana Man]

don't try and backtrack, you had to wait for Jim to come on to even offer an argument, you stole his and now are trying to use it, when I and Nally both pushed you for a rationale to your persoanl abuse you couldn't do it

i think you will find you did say i had something against Obama, and i quote ''If people have ideological reasons for not wanting President Obama to come they should state them or say nothing''- you really are in knots now you muppet

Your argument is that you couldn't see the tourism potential of Obama in Ireland and you are now arguing that others couldn't see it either? Wow.

Your second point is even more embarrassing. Notice the word President. All the arguments against the Queen are on the basis of what she represents (Head of the British Army etc.), any argument against Obama would obviously be the same. Unless of course you can find someone who thinks he shouldn't come because he is a shite basketballer.

it's like talking to a stuffed animal - sorry i am

no-one has offered me a breakdown of why President Obama will bring a tourism boost to Ireland, the demographic breakdown of the american visitors is massively limited to retired Irish Americans, America is officially out of recession so we will see a bounce in those visiting these shores, the number of non irish americans increasing in visits to here will be largely limited, and him spending 5 hours here will not boost that in any way shape or form, i suspect it will not even make the news headlines so any exposure will be of little use, he was in south america a couple of weeks ago will that boost tourism there? highly doubtful, no one can give me an argument for the economic benefits that will accrue from this, least of all you

the only person that should be embarrased is you, you mentioned my opposition to Obama, not president but obama now you are going round in circles trying to deflect from your terrible excuse for debating.

Now why don't you slide on back down to Sesame street, i think they are doing the letter 'Z' today, nice we easy one to break you in, good lad