Lewis will destroy Tyson

[Newbie]

"Hey newbie, you're getting a little repetitous."

No, you continue trying to back out of what you said.

"Try addressing what I actually said instead of building a straw man argument."

All right, here it is.

"Jamaica is a British Colony
I'll spell it out for you in baby language:
Jamaica is to Great Britain as Hawaii is to the United States.
Now I have a question for you:
Do you have any objection to natives of Hawaii representing the U.S.?"

Take a look at your exact words and tell me if it is in agreement with your later statement.

"My point was that since Jamaica was a British Colony it is not unusual for a Jamaican to have British Citizenship."

Let's take a closer look.

"Jamaica is to Great Britain as Hawaii is to the United States."

This statement seems pretty straightforward to me. It also seems contradictory to the one that follows.

"I didn't say EVERY Jamaican is a British Citizen. Can your nit-wit brain understand the difference??????"

I understand that EVERY citizen of Hawaii is a citizen of the U.S. I also understand that Jamaica is a soverign nation while Hawaii is not. I also understand that Jamaica has it's own Olympic team while Hawaii does not. Also, I thought you were so adamant about the fact that "Brits are "subjects" not "citizens".

"BTW Please learn the difference between "it's" & "its". We're talking basic grammar here."

What next, are you going to break out the spell-checker on me?

[Aloha From Hell]

Hey Dildo,

I'll say it again for the nth time, the anology was to advance the argument that geographically disparate regions often retain the same citizenship. You are building a straw man in which you assume every infinite aspect of an analogy must be correct for the analogy to be valid. Any idiot can find a circumstance in which an analogy does not hold, this does not necessarily mean the anology is flawed. By persuing this strawman you prove your argument to be bankrupt. Is that ALL you've got???

By the way, what was that you said about no Irish considering themselves English? Now that was an emphatic statement which is completely and absolutely bullshit. It proves that you are willing to speculate about things you know nothing about. This makes you yet another lame Internet blowhard who didn't quite make it to the school debating team.

Keep going idiot, and keep quoting the same old stuff over and over and over. We can all crack embarassed smiles as you do.

LMAO.

[Newbie]

"You are building a straw man"

Let's take a look at your entire post again.

"Hey Big Bird, you're really not too smart are you?
Jamaica is a British Colony
I'll spell it out for you in baby language:
Jamaica is to Great Britain as Hawaii is to the United States.
Now I have a question for you:
Do you have any objection to natives of Hawaii representing the U.S.?"

There is the entire post.

"My point was that since Jamaica was a British Colony it is not unusual for a Jamaican to have British Citizenship."

That statement is in no way compatible with an analogy which equates the relationship between Jamaica and Great Britian with that between Hawaii and the other 49 states of the U.S. Look at how you attempt to retreat even further from your analogy with the following statement.

"I'll say it again for the nth time, the anology was to advance the argument that geographically disparate regions often retain the same citizenship."

Where exactly do you mention the topic of geographically disparate regions in the post? Hawaii and the rest of the United States are geographically disparate. Jamaica and England are also geographically disparate. That is not where the analogy falls apart.


You accuse me of being repetitious despite the fact that you continue to insist that your analogy is not flawed. However, I have not said one word about the "Irish thing" as you call it since your first response to the issue. You then continue to bring it up with childish statements such as "First of all, I really got you on the Irish thing. And you know it." and several posts later with "By the way, what was that you said about no Irish considering themselves English?".

Let's take a look at what I said:

"Try convincing an Irishman that he's English."

What was it you said about straw man arguments?

"You are building a straw man in which you assume every infinite aspect of an analogy must be correct for the analogy to be valid. Any idiot can find a circumstance in which an analogy does not hold, this does not necessarily mean the anology is flawed."

Since less than 4% of the population of Ireland is Protestant, I guess my analogy seems pretty solid for the most part. Which is not even to mention the fact that I am completely taking your word for it that all those Irish Protestants consider themselves to be English. I don't mean ethnically either. My ethnic background comes from the country of Luxemburg and I sure as hell don't consider myself a Luxemburger, especially considering that I have never been to Luxemburg in my life and I am not a citizen of Luxemburg.
Assuming that those Irish Protestans consider themselves to be Englishmen, I guess my analogy still holds true in over 96% of the cases.

Let's take a look at your analogy again:

"Jamaica is to Great Britian as Hawaii is to the United States"

"I didn't say EVERY Jamaican is a British Citizen"

What percentage of Jamaicans are British citizens? Is it much more than 96%? Actually, even if 100% of them were, that still would not make them English. Remember, BigBird's original question was "How can someone born in Jamaica who represented Canada in the Olympics be considered English?" (Notice the key word SOMEONE, not neccisarily Lennox Lewis). Well, unless considerably more than 96% of them are British citizens they aren't British (let alone English) according to your criteria.
This, combined with the fact that Hawaii is not a nation, does not have it's own Olympic team, Hawaiins automatically have American citizenship, all Hawaiins are eligible to vote in U.S. presidential elections, Hawaiins pay the same federal income taxes to the U.S. government that citizens of other states do, Hawaii does not have it's own military, and many others make your analogy seem pretty flawed. That is, unless I have only brought up minor, insignificant exceptions.

[bobby_steeles]

benny hill is a comic genius.

[Aloha From Hell]

Originally posted by Newbie
Since less than 4% of the population of Ireland is Protestant, I guess my analogy seems pretty solid for the most part.

Okay, time to make newbie look like a fool again. Here are the government census figures (from Encarta online and the Irish Tourist Board web site):

Population of Ireland is 5.2 million
Population of Northern Ireland is 1.6 million
Population of the Republic is 3.6 million
Protestant Population of NI is 1 million

Therefore protestants make up the majority (62.5%) in Northern Ireland and the minority in the combined states (19.2%).

These figures do not include protestants living in the Republic.

Where did you pull that 4% number from, your ass? Here's some advice Newbie, don't get into a factual argument with me unless you have solid data at hand. I challenge you to show where you got 4% from.

Put up or SHUT UP!

[Tony10]

You go get 'em, Aloha.

Whew. I saw that comment about Irish people "considering themselves English" and just about feel otta me cheer!

[Newbie]

The 4% is out of the Republic of Ireland. Taken into the totals you provided, that still only makes the total about 25% if we include Northern Ireland. That still leaves 75% non-protestant Irishmen. Something else got my attention when I was looking at the map of Great Briain. I couldn't find Jamaica anywhere on that map. Just out of curiosity, I looked at the population figures of Great Britain. I noticed that the publishers of Encarta Encyclopedia had accidentally left the population of Jamaica out of their totals. I immediately looked up the population figures of the United States and noticed that they did include the population of Hawaii in their totals. I couldn't figure out why Hawaii is listed on the map of the United States and Jamaica is not listed on the map of Great Britain. I called the publisher and informed them that "Jamaica is to Great Britain as Hawaii is to the United States" and recommended that they fix their mistake. I was told that I was incorrect. They were insistent that the relationship between Jamaica and Great Britain is not the same as the relationship as that between the United States and Hawaii. The debate raged on for hours until I informed them that 25% of the population of Ireland is Protestant. With nothing left to say, the publishers promised to fix the error in their next publication.

Besides this "Irish thing", which you continue to dwell on out of desperation, there is the fact that this is merely a peripheral issue to one of my many points. Let's take a look at my quote:
"However, even being a British citizen does not make one English."
"Try convincing an Irishman that he's English."
Of course, you took the liberty of re-wording this statement to "no Irishmen considering themselves English." The main point appears to be "However, even being a British citizen does not make one English." That point has in no way been refuted by you in any way. Instead, you continue to desperately dwell on my choice of Ireland as an example and the number of Protestants that live there. Does the fact that 25% of the population of Ireland is ethnically English refute that statement in any way? If ethnicity is what we're talking about here, I guess I must have been wrong in my earlier statements where I said that Lennox Lewis is English on account of the fact that he was born in England and lived there until he was 12 because he sure doesn't appear to be ethnically English. What about the Scottish and Welsh? They are part of Great Britain, are they English as well? Remember, the point was "being a British citizen does not make one English." It seems to me that for the most part, the only people that call themselves English are the citizens of England.
So, 75% of the population of Ireland is non-Protestant and 0% of the square area of Jamaica is counted towards the square area of Great Britain, let alone that of England. Remember, they are not English solely on account of the fact that they are part of Great Britain(which they aren't anyhow).
Another point I would like to make is that even if 100% of the people in Ireland were English as opposed to Irish, you would still have the issue of Wales and Scotland. The worst I would be guilty of would be possibly choosing a poor example to prove my point. The point itself is still valid.

Actually, I guess I should be trying to back out of what I said with some lame statements like these: Hey Dildo, this is what I was really saying. There might possibly be a few rebellious Irishmen that on extremely rare occasions harbor delusional fantasies about Irish nationality which lead them to have reservations in accepting the fact that they are undoubtedly English. I was in no way implying that the overwhelming majority of the people in Ireland actually consider themselves to be Irish. Are you too stupid to understand the difference? Obviously, I must agree that in the case of Lennox Lewis, it comes down to where he was born and raised as opposed to ethnicity, and in the case of the Protestants in Ireland, it comes down to ethnicity as opposed to where they were born and raised. Continue making a fool of youself by attempting to debate with an intellectual giant such as myself.


Now, back to the point at hand. How can someone born in Jamaica be considered English on account of the fact that Jamaica is a British colony?
If Jamaica really were to Great Britain as Hawaii is to the United States, this would be correct. However, we still have not resolved the fact that Jamaica is not shown on the map of Great Britain, whereas Hawaii is listed on the map of the United States. We still have not resolved the fact that Jamaica is a nation and Hawaii is not. We still have not resolved the fact that Hawaii does not have it's own military. We still have not resolved the fact that Hawaii does not have it's own Olympic team.
Do you want to know something else? I was incorrect before when I stated that if Jamaicans automatically had British citizenship on account of their previous colonial status that that would make the analogy correct. It would not. Remember, we are not talking about the citizens when we use a statement such as "Jamaica is to Great Britain as Hawaii is to the United States." We are talking about the countries themselves. Unless Jamaica is actually part of Great Britain, this analogy is more than flawed, it is blatantly false even IF 100% of it's citizens WERE also British citizens.

Here are some anlogies I will make and I would like to see you refute.

1. Jamaica is NOT to Great Britain as Hawaii is to the United States.

2. Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales are to Great Britain as Hawaii is to the United States.

Side note: It is possible to be British without being English. It could be said that this is the case with Scotsmen, Irishmen, and Welshmen.


No matter what you call me or how many times you call me it, no matter how many rhetorical, juvenile wisecracks you make, no matter how desperately you attempt to divert attention with "the Irish thing", you will have a very hard time convincing me that someone born in Jamaica that represented Canada in the Olympics is English on account of Jamaica's previous colonial status. Then again, I guess I'm being repetitous when I keep brining up the original topic of the debate as opposed to attempting to divert attention by desperately grasping at any factual mistakes you might make and clutching them like a life-preserver.


Here is my prediction of your next post.

HA HA HA!!! You forgot to count the total of Northern Ireland. This whole debate hinges on the topic of Ireland and how many Protestants live there. What I was really saying in regards to Jamaica is that there might be some Jamaicans with British citizenship. Are you such a moron that you can not see this? You continue to make yourself look like a blah, blah, blah when you go on like this.

Let's see how accurate I am in my prediction.

[Newbie]

Tony10

I'm curious as to which way you were laughing. Are you saying that Irishmen do consider themselves to be English and that the stereotype of Irishmen disliking English is not based in reality? Were you laughing at Aloha's examples of Irishmen considering themselves to be English or were you laughing at me stating that Irishmen don't consider themselves to be English. It appears that you were laughing at me, unless you were being sarcastic when you said "You go get 'em Aloha." If you were laughing at me, then it appears I chose a poor example to prove my point. However, the point itself is still valid. That point being that not all citizens of Great Britain are English.

[Tony10]

Don't sweat it, Newbie: I'm laughing at the whole thing, really.

However, whoever said that Irish consider themselves to be English is taking the piss out of all of us.

That is just absurd.

[Capt Howdy]

Wasn't Frank Bruno an amazing Brit...........Lewis hits the canvas....he's beaten a bunch of has beens and never wheres..............Iron Mike Rules.........

[Aloha From Hell]

Originally posted by Tony10
Don't sweat it, Newbie: I'm laughing at the whole thing, really.

However, whoever said that Irish consider themselves to be English is taking the piss out of all of us.

That is just absurd.

Tony, the protestants in Northern Ireland do consider themselves English in many cases. Of course, an Irish Catholic would rather die than be English!

[Tony10]

True.

[stusskilla]

TYSON WILL DESTROY LEWIS-STUSSKILLA-

It's as simple as that, obviously what just happened here is that Lennox Lewis's boyfriend came on and said that he thinks lewis will win. Guess what genious, Lewis will be the underdog, Tyson isn't the biggest draw of all time because for no reason, it's because he's the deadliest fighter of ALL TIME. As far as this genius saying brits are tough as nails, american fighters are soft, All you guys have is Lewis, other than that, what do you have? Suga shane is soft? Delahoya is soft? Tyson is soft?

Mike Tyson by KO round 4
Look who Lewis is fighting next, a joke, let Tua have another go, at least he has a chance, Rahman is a joke

[Angel_of_Pain]

LOL let Tua go he would have a chance! lol man funniest line in recent week, come on Lewis is way too good boxer for Tua and he have prove it. As for the Tyson vs. lewis bout i think Lewis will win but Tyson should give him trouble if he train and dont do shit, if Tyson take it seriously he got a chance. It should be one hell of a fight!

[Tony10]

Yawn. Enough about Lewis/Tyson; until they get in the damn ring and do it, this is like the Rickson/Sak argument.

Far more exciting, IMHO, will be the Naz/Barerra fight on April 7th.

Everybody's assuming Naz will paste him, but I don't know.....