Molly Malone never existed?!

An interesting article that claims Molly Malone as per the song never existed and was a myth helped by Scots!

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/282075/Research-shows-Dublin-s-darling-Molly-Malone-was-never-alive-alive-oh-

Originally posted by The Express:

But now researchers have discovered the beautiful fishmonger, who sold cockles and mussels from a cart in Dublin before dying of fever, did not exist and was dreamed up by a Scotsman to mock the Irish.

"Now" in tabloid speak means "it's slow news day, just recycle some old but obscure crap, it's not like our readers know the difference".
See here for example.

Now I'm kind of interested in her, real or not. Maybe I'll write a story staring her. Maybe instead of being a prostitute at night, she slays....hrm...vampires are kind of old hat. She sells fish, so maybe a cyclopedian monstrosity from the seismic depths is interfering with fish supply...or even worse turning the good people of Dublin into blasphemous fish-frogs (Don't worry, there's only one, maybe forum members that have the faintest idea of what I'm blathering about )

Maybe the fish bits she sells aren't - umm, entirely fish
In other words, kinda fishy
Maybe at night she goes into the water and always has something to sell in the morning

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

(Don't worry, there's only one, maybe forum members that have the faintest idea of what I'm blathering about )

Hrmmm...a werefish but not really a mermaid....interesting.

Were-Deep-One?
By night she goes all Blade on them, by day she pulls a Fritz Haarmann and sells the leftovers?

This thread smells of.....

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

She sells fish, so maybe a cyclopedian monstrosity from the seismic depths is interfering with fish supply...or even worse turning the good people of Dublin into blasphemous fish-frogs

I've got some fish-supply-interference suspects lined up!

Originally posted by Macallan:

Were-Deep-One?

Well sure. Lovecraft himself will rise from the grave and show up at the door to congratulate me

Originally posted by Macallan:

by day she pulls a Fritz Haarmann and sells the leftovers?

Nope. That's her bait.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

I've got some fish-supply-interference suspects lined up!

Aww, cute. :gets on ebay and orders one :

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Awww, a Sock Cthulhu, I want one!

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Macallan:

Were-Deep-One?

Well sure. Lovecraft himself will rise from the grave and show up at the door to congratulate me

Or beat the crap out of you, better have a bunch of Elder Signs ready

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Macallan:

by day she pulls a Fritz Haarmann and sells the leftovers?

Nope. That's her bait.

Going for the big 'fish' , is she?

Originally posted by Macallan:

Going for the big 'fish' , is she?

As she "fishes" she chants "ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Macallan:

Going for the big 'fish' , is she?

As she "fishes" she chants "ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"

For the uninitiated,

"In his house at R'lyeh dead Cthulhu waits dreaming"

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Macallan:

Going for the big 'fish' , is she?

As she "fishes" she chants "ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"

And the result looks kinda like this?

My wife also shared this knitting someone made after seeing a suspicious being that was interfering with the fish supply.

Men! Knitting!? Ask your wife.

Another Irish myth bites the dust.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Another Irish myth bites the dust.

Meh, every country has myths and legends that aren't literally true. The true in the myths is in how they touch the soul of the people.

Pity eh they had to have a Scotsman create that myth for them when they have at times sometimes been good at such themselves?!

Supposedly that legend was supposed to mock the Irish, but don't worry, Ireland has plenty of its own homegrown mythology

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Pity eh they had to have a Scotsman create that myth for them when they have at times sometimes been good at such themselves?!

So that scotsman was more of a liar than all the irish together? Now that's something to be proud of

What do you expect? Some Scots are proud of putting on prissy orange sashes and mincing down the street like that. Of course they do it to remember Her Inbred Majesty

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

What do you expect? Some Scots are proud of putting on prissy orange sashes and mincing down the street like that.

And then whine about the competition on CSD and similar events

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Meh, every country has myths and legends that aren't literally true. The true in the myths is in how they touch the soul of the people. [underlining added]

Or maybe how the false and refutable inspires the insipid…? I'd, of course, ask: What criteria do you use to delineate "the soul of the people"?

Oh, not only Scots Sanguinemoon but English, Welsh, Northern Irish, Southern Irish (in 4 Counties + Dublin), Americans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, Togoans, Ghananians and scattered ones in South America, Poland, Rome, etc. We don't mince we walk we leave the mincing to what passes for military in the ex-Colonies. And let's not forget the legions of mincing clerics from the old red socks lot!

And mouthy Macallan the Scot who did the composing wasn't a liar he was being funny and having a good laugh at Irish expense. That was no doubt due to the influx we suffered here in the 19th century were mostly ignorarant and superstitious country yokels never mind controlled in every way by the men in black. They know better than that one now!

Originally posted by rjhowie:

And mouthy Macallan the Scot who did the composing wasn't a liar he was being funny and having a good laugh at Irish expense.

That's what I was having trouble understanding. OK, have a laugh at Irish expense, just like the Drunken Scotsman song is a laugh at Scottish expense. But seriously Molly Malone seems more the stuff of tragedy than comedy.

Well I don't mind anyone having a laugh at Irish, Scots, Britons, Americans or whoever. It's just that the Scots mind was a bit quicker than the Irish ones!

If you tell a joke and nobody laughs ( and I mean nobody ) that's because:

• everybody's stupid
• your joke just wasn't funny

There is a lesson here if I can only work out what it is.
She had a song written about her.
She had a statue made of her.
I had never heard of her.
She never existed.
I had it right all along.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

It's just that the Scots mind was a bit quicker than the Irish ones!

Speed versus accuracy. The Scottish "joke" was so unfunny that the Irish, and others, actually empathized with poor Molly instead of laughing at her. Like I said, it probably did happen, even if her name was wasn't Molly. By the way, was Scotland so fortunate that there were no poor women suffering a similar fate? I think not; no country was. The Irish joke about the Sleeping Scotsman, on the other hand, is so hilarious people without Scottish or Irish ancestors laugh at it. Imagine a guy so drunk that he passes out and doesn't even notice young women tying a bow to his willie You see, its a gentle, accurate ribbing and not a mean-spirit "joke" at the expense of poor women.

Just so you're not confused, it's not because Molly is Irish.

Maybe I will write a story about her, forgetting the Lovecraftian nonsense that we were joking about earlier.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Maybe I will write a story about her, forgetting the Lovecraftian nonsense that we were joking about earlier.

You mean this isn't about her?

You give the old Irish too much credit there Sanguinemoon but understandable coming from across the pond!

Hrmm....Molly Malone vs Jack the Ripper ! Plus a serious story. The story follows the idea that Jack was actually one of the inbred British nobles. It occurs to Jack in his IQ 84 mind (perhaps giving an inbred noble too much credit) that he's about to be captured, so he flees to Dublin to start is "profession" in a fresh place. He stalks Molly and makes his move when he thinks the time is right in his feeble noble mind, so she whacks him upside the head with her biggest fish Of course, the fact that Molly's story takes place a couple hundred years before Jack's means nothing in these type of mash-ups (to preempt Oakdale thinking he's so very intelligent by pointing that out )

Originally posted by rjhowie:

You give the old Irish too much credit there Sanguinemoon but understandable coming from across the pond!

What do you mean? I think the drunken Scotsman song is Irish. I found it posted on Youtube attributed to the folk band The Irish Rovers, although a band member (or somebody claiming to be one) posted to say that unfortunately that wasn't them. The lyrics also give that band credit.

I still don't understand why Howie has to be so chauvinistic about Ireland. Yes, the RC church had to much influence for a long time, but they've broken free of that Ireland's economy now outstrips Scotland's by wide margin, even if they now have deficit issues that will be fixed by some reforms.

Oh heavens hiow right I was about Yanks and Ireland. Some reforms? The place is almost bankrupt don't you know? Public service employees have all had a a percentage taken off their salaries they overspent as if there was no tomorrow. Building stoppe3d. There are estates lying half built and vandlaised, office buildings where the cranes have been inactive on again part built creations. Indeed the country only started getting somewhere following joining the EEC and getting financial handouts. It was poor for decades and incapable of moving on due to the dead hand of the men in black and the traditionalists wanting to hang onto the past rather than aloow the people to move on.

I fully agree the modern Ireland is somewhat different from the old and the Molly Malone days where it could never get out of the bit itself and indeed the Church controlled the strings and the police. That it has thrown out the Nuncio and closed the Rome legation shows they are moving on from living in shawls and that massive corruption. I have visited it more than once whilst over the Border and they are better educated and more progressive although there are still some nuts who haven't moved on but they are a minority. But to say that a few simple things will correct the situation is too simplistic. The bigger economies in Europe including our own have been subsidising these small nations or they would still be backwaters. And apart from that money we pay in we are now giving Ireland a loan of billions on top of that as a seperate thing. The new Irish government that has taken over has also found that things were ven worse than known too.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

The bigger economies in Europe including our own have been subsidising these small nations

You mean what's happened with Scotland the bigger economy to the south of it? Traditionally, Scotland is relatively poor country by European standards. So it seems a little bizarre that a Scotsman would mock a Irish girl for being poor, especially back then when Scotland was what we could call a Third World or Developing country itself. It's like a Zimbabwean mocking a Somalia for being poor today. Instead of mocking the fellow poor country, it would make more sense to trade resources, etc to help each other grow.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Some reforms?

The usual. A combination of tax hikes and spending cuts. For example, many corporations such as Google transfer profits to Ireland for the lower tax rates. Ireland could raise some of the those taxes without risking damage to the economy. That's just off the top of my head; I'm sure there are deeper reforms that can be done.

Shows a gap in your history I am afraid Sanguinemoon!

The 19th century seen legions of Irish flocking to the Scotland which had shipyards, massive engineering plants, coal mining, railways to build and so on. A complete contrast to Ireland which had nothing and no great natural resources in case you didn't know? Those Irish of a particular ilk were ill-educated and took jobs and helped in many places create wider poverty. We ended up with a 6-figure Irish influx because there were jobs here! However your comment about the Scots attitude to the Irsh was the 19th century outlook as they seemed to be not too bright and told what to do by Gestapo like clergy. All good fodder for satire. A bit like Americans still do with Poles and Polish jokes........

In today's Southern Ireland they are having tax hikes and wage cuts and spending cuts all together and still in a quagmire. This mean even more and the EEC money is obviously not enough when they are content to take a further 7 or 8 billion of a loan from generous us at reasonable rates. Ireland depended on the EEC handouts and misused it hence the present horrible situation. I am happy that some of the money did improve things like education, wider attitudes and so on because the country was too poor and incapable of giving people what was needed. It had also lived on mawkish patriotism that was providing nothing after decades. That it is a more moderm pluralistic society is to it's credit. It it wasn't for the EEC they would still be stuck as a backwater and depend on us just to keep things ticking over.

I am also glad that there is a change in political attitudes and this came with better education and understanding and there are many Irish people today who are a credit thanks to Europe and bigger countries supplying the money for the improvements.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

The 19th century seen legions of Irish flocking to the Scotland which had shipyards, massive engineering plants, coal mining, railways to build and so on.

That may be true, but Molly Malone dates from the 17th century, not the 19th. The earliest audio recording of the song dates from 1883, when it was published in Cambridge, Massachusetts (from that area of the US, either by Irish immigrants or by their children) However, there are much older published lyrics to the song.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

A bit like Americans still do with Poles and Polish jokes........

Those don't happen as often as they used to, but I see the point that you're making. I think those are rude too. The history of the jokes comes from the Poles attempting to defend their country against the NAZI war machine. It was the Blitz vs horseback cavalry. So, some small minded Americans thought. " the 'pollocks' are stupid..." In fact, it was brave men trying to defend their country against impossible odds, knowing they were charging to certain death. Those are men that should be honored for their bravery and not mocked.

I can appreciate good satire. I grew up with song Who Threw the Overalls in Mrs. Murphy's Chowder?

Mrs. Murphy gave a party
Just about a week ago.
Everything was plentiful,
The Murphys, they're not slow.
They treated us like gentlemen;
We tried to act the same,
If it weren't for what happened...
Well, it was a doggone shame.
When Mrs. Murphy dished the chowder out,
She fainted on the spot;
She found a pair of overalls
At the bottom of the pot.
McGinty, he got roaring mad,
His eyes were bulging out,
He jumped onto the piano
And loudly he did shout:

"Who threw the overalls
In Mrs. Murphy's chowder?"
Nobody spoke, so he
Shouted all the louder.
"It's a rotten trick that's true,
I can lick the drip that threw
The overalls in Mrs. Murphy's chowder."

They dragged the pants from out the soup
And laid them on the floor;
Each man swore upon his life,
He'd ne'er seen them before.
They were plastered up with mortar
And had patches on the knee,
They'd had their many ups and downs
As we could plainly see.
And when Mrs. Murphy, she came to,
She b'gan to cry and pout,
She'd put them in the wash that day
And forgot to pull them out.
McGinty, he excused himself
For what he said that night,
So we put music to the words
And sang with all our might:

"Who threw the overalls
In Mrs. Murphy's chowder?"
Nobody spoke, so we
Shouted all the louder.
"It's a rotten trick that's true,
And we'll lick the drip that threw
The overalls in Mrs. Murphy's chowder."

It satirizes the Irish family, but isn't as mean spirited as Molly Malone seems to be. Of course, it goes back to Molly Malone being so unfunny ringing so true that it passed into Irish legend. Mrs. Murphy was probably so drunk or silly that she put the overalls in the stew herself.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

In fact, it was brave men trying to defend their country against impossible odds, knowing they were charging to certain death. Those are men that should be honored for their bravery and not mocked.

And it's not like they just stopped & cried when they were overrun

And than there were the Cursed Soldiers continuing after the war against the Stalinist government

They were able to occupy a village until the the authorities returned with excessive force.

Fair assessment there Sanguinemoon re the Poles. I often thought it ironic that we went to war over Polish freedom buit somehow that idea died in 1945? And I had a late uncle who was with the Free Polish Forces here. For years apart from Americans and Polish jokes we have had it too with the English making jokes on Scots being mean but actually derived from what was once their carefullness with money. Inside Scotland we in turn joke about Aberdeen people being mean and so it goes on.

The poor Poles got a raw deal from the Germans, Allies and later the Soviets. Never mind the forest massacre which the Reds tried to dump on the Germans. Even earlier they lost their monarchy and independence becoming a mere province in the Imperial Russian Empire. Certainly an independent minded people?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

The poor Poles got a raw deal from the Germans, Allies and later the Soviets

In fact, the Germans and the Soviets conspired to divide the country between them. The country has suffered much in the 19th and most of the 20th centuries, but now is making great strides

I am sure that I mentioned the divsion of Poland between the Third Reich and USSR a long time ago and common knowledge. The two had conspired to split it and Himmler send Gesatop agents to Moscow to learn their techniques.

Certainly Poland is doing better now but isn't the EEC a lot to do with that and money? Standing just on it's own may not have seen it progressing as far?

That wasn't the first time it happened either.

At the same time we cannot claim however that before the Russians and Germans got their concordat to split it the country was hardly as much of a wonderful society as today. It also harboured a deep seated anti-Jewish trait too.

Actually the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was one of the more religiously tolerant countries of its time. Why do you think so many jews have slavic surnames?

Perhaps not as tolerant as you may think Macallan. When I was younger I used to read of the tiny Protestant community having a really hard time from the red socks mob who made things very difficult for them.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Perhaps not as tolerant as you may think Macallan. When I was younger I used to read of the tiny Protestant community having a really hard time from the red socks mob who made things very difficult for them.

Perhaps you didn't quite understand what I wrote. "relatively tolerant for its time" isn't anywhere near the same as "tolerant as understood in one of today's western democracies".

I would say that your description was not time related hence my comment. Most countires through modern communication, social changes, outside presures alter in due course. For a similar example I also had newsletters and articles my late father would pas on showing how Protetsants in Columbia used to be persecuted even a lot worse. Burning of buildings, physical attacks, etc. Today the Reformed Faith is a large constitutency there and right across South America. Changed days indeed.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

I would say that your description was not time related hence my comment.

Then let me repeat it:

Originally posted by Macallan:

Actually the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was one of the more religiously tolerant countries of its time.

Emphasis added in case you miss it again.
Also, the comment was about toleration of jews. Protestantism was still relatively new at the time and never really got a hold in eastern europe anyway so I didn't bother looking up how they were treated in the commonwealth.

Well not bothering isn't a definitive answer but a reply to suit a stance. Poland's idea of "religious tolerance" was based on the indepth loyalty to the Roman Catholic faith. In pracrice it meant that small Protestant churches were easy to persecure at the local level and such were deliberately ignored in a Roman Catholic supremacy as it even included the fact that the RC Church were dfar from silent about apostosy.

Neither are you right that Protestantism hadn't been there long or relatively new. In fact the Polish Reformed Church started in the 1500's (!). At one point almost 20% of the population and 45% of the Nobility. Thereafter it had a chequered history of ups and dows kind of naturally in a county with such a strong inbuilt Romanism. The Refromed Faith did have a constant syrggle in the 20th century in places like Poland and the other example, Columbia hence the magazine and newqsletter reports for the periods. As much as there had been some positive attitudes they ebbed and flowed and the power of the (R) Church pervaded most of the time.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well not bothering isn't a definitive answer but a reply to suit a stance. Poland's idea of "religious tolerance" was based on the indepth loyalty to the Roman Catholic faith. In pracrice it meant that small Protestant churches were easy to persecure at the local level and such were deliberately ignored in a Roman Catholic supremacy as it even included the fact that the RC Church were dfar from silent about apostosy.

Do you have any idea what we've been talking about?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Neither are you right that Protestantism hadn't been there long or relatively new. In fact the Polish Reformed Church started in the 1500's (!).

And the Commonwealth existed from 1569–1795. Your point is what exactly?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

At one point almost 20% of the population and 45% of the Nobility.

At which point? Without context that number is completely meaningless.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Thereafter it had a chequered history of ups and dows kind of naturally in a county with such a strong inbuilt Romanism. The Refromed Faith did have a constant syrggle in the 20th century in places like Poland and the other example, Columbia hence the magazine and newqsletter reports for the periods. As much as there had been some positive attitudes they ebbed and flowed and the power of the (R) Church pervaded most of the time.

Ah, you forgot all about the context. Reminder: we were talking about the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which ceased to exist well before the 20th century.

Oh, I am perfectly aware of what i am talking about. It seems you have an idiosyncrasy that even for subjects that are not the least seriously confrontatational you resort to this sneering self-importance. To explain to the closed mind I would point out that Protestantism existed in Poland as far back as the 1500's. That was during the time of the Commonwealth you attach so much importance to. It was you I would remind again that introduced the "Commowealth" regarding Poland and stated (unknowingly, wow!) that Protestants were more recent during a point raising the 18th century. All I did was point out that there was a more considerable time span. It is an odd thing that if challenged on the least wee thing you immediately spring to some defensive postion and morph it into something more confrontational. In your illustrations on Poland I made no effort to indicate any deep criticism in your expostion but just point out a fact you werre either unaware of or ignored.

So my point that Prots existed earlier and during the period you decided to bring up was correct. Poland didn't cease to exist at the end of the Commonwealth and in pointing out that Protestants were having a rough time right into the 20th century was valid in the overall picture rather than be static in one period raised by you. So all I essentially did was enlarge the picture in a moderate but it didn't deserve the reaction. I reckon I was being quite reasonable in my submission?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Oh, I am perfectly aware of what i am talking about. It seems you have an idiosyncrasy that even for subjects that are not the least seriously confrontatational you resort to this sneering self-importance. To explain to the closed mind I would point out that Protestantism existed in Poland as far back as the 1500's.

You would look a lot less like a buffoon if your 'responses' had anything to do with what you're 'responding' to. Am I using too many big words? Too long sentences? Do you just not read or do you have trouble remembering things for longer than a few seconds?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

That was during the time of the Commonwealth you attach so much importance to. It was you I would remind again that introduced the "Commowealth" regarding Poland and stated (unknowingly, wow!) that Protestants were more recent during a point raising the 18th century.

Read again, I said no such thing.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

All I did was point out that there was a more considerable time span.

All you did was to pick some words out of context and blather on.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

It is an odd thing that if challenged on the least wee thing you immediately spring to some defensive postion and morph it into something more confrontational. In your illustrations on Poland I made no effort to indicate any deep criticism in your expostion but just point out a fact you werre either unaware of or ignored.

Challenged? You didn't challenge anyone on anything.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

So my point that Prots existed earlier and during the period you decided to bring up was correct.

Evidently you didn't understand my last post. What exactly was it that caused you trouble?
Hint: I never said there were no protestants in the area at the time.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Poland didn't cease to exist at the end of the Commonwealth and in pointing out that Protestants were having a rough time right into the 20th century was valid in the overall picture rather than be static in one period raised by you.

Still completely irrelevant. When the Commonwealth ceased to exist all its territory was divided up between Russia, Prussia and Austria. There was no Polish state until 1918.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

So all I essentially did was enlarge the picture in a moderate but it didn't deserve the reaction. I reckon I was being quite reasonable in my submission?

I didn't say you're wrong either ( do you understand anything I write? At all? ) just that you keep missing the point by several miles every single time.
You keep coming up with counters that have nothing whatsoever to do with any point I made. The original point was that the polish-lithuanian commonwealth was relatively tolerant regarding religions during its existence - remember, that was the time where other countries were expelling people or burning them at the stake for belonging to the wrong christian denomination. Treatment of protestants in the 19th century has nothing to do with that - the commonwealth ceased to exist much earlier.

No you see any contrasting view to your own as not being understood or deliberately taken the wrong way. It has been so incessantly even if you are to be reasonable not understanding or seeing that. Even on the purely routine matter of that "Commonwealth" there were difficult times for Prots. So when you add before and after there has been degrees of continuity whether you like that or otherwise.

This built-in arrogance to any view that doesn't fit you is not a pleasant thing and you resort to sneering arrogance re buffoonery or anything similar. You really must try and see things in a wider view than a blinkered "I am right and everyone else is not on my plain" attitude. You also indicated in a part about the 8th century and that Protestantism had only been there a short time before when in fact it was two centuries earler. So maybe you should control your own fecklessness before slicing at anyone else? When you do err (that can happen even with bullishness) you ignore it and instead bluff past such with condemnation. You must try and see that your sis only an opinion like mine or anyone else's and not some built-in fount of brilliance that othersdsomehow silly not to see. At least Molly Malone didn't exist but you do!

Originally posted by Macallan:

do you understand anything I write? At all?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

No you see any contrasting view to your own as not being understood or deliberately taken the wrong way. It has been so incessantly even if you are to be reasonable not understanding or seeing that. Even on the purely routine matter of that "Commonwealth" there were difficult times for Prots. So when you add before and after there has been degrees of continuity whether you like that or otherwise.

I'll take that as a resounding 'NO'

Originally posted by Macallan:

This built-in arrogance to any view that doesn't fit you is not a pleasant thing and you resort to sneering arrogance re buffoonery or anything similar.

... and more of your usual huffing & puffing without any evidence of any comprehension whatsoever. This is pointless.

You could never admit to anything as I found a while ago and can take anything as an answer as long as it suits your blinekered mind. You just can't resist the temptation to swipe can you? What a sad life you must have. Oh well, fairground roundabouts are for enjoying so keep it up!

Originally posted by rjhowie:

You could never admit to anything as I found a while ago and can take anything as an answer as long as it suits your blinekered mind.

I would if there was anything to admit to, which you'd never know since you don't seem to understand anything I write

Originally posted by rjhowie:

You just can't resist the temptation to swipe can you? What a sad life you must have. Oh well, fairground roundabouts are for enjoying so keep it up!

Indeed, you're such an easy target it's ridiculous.

You get riled and growly so easily. Brilliant and keep your consistency up Mac-the-knife.