Northern Ireland 2125?

You miss the point yet again. McDonalds is simply called McDonalds. If the name outside was Mcdonalds Restaurant then by your logic it should be changed to bi-Lingual to be welcoming to everyone, sez you. we would have this sig above every McD's in the country:

Bialanna McDonalds

McDonalds Restaurant

On boards.ie why is there not demand to have any of the headers or pages bi-lingual?

And I asked you the not unreasonable question why do republicans like yourself not think to ask to get the header at the top of this page ( eg "Posts" "Categories" "Groups") in to dual language / Irish, if you are so keen on Irish? Is it because you know that a website that does that will suffer? After all, the more Irish the better and "every word of Irish is a bullet for Irish Freedom"? It is obvious who you enjoy shooting the bullets at.

I know that, and I also know they do not confuse everyone by having a stupid bi-lingual name

Royal Irish regiment

Reisimint Ríoga Ireann

Because it is only a motto. Look up the definition of motto if you do not know what it is.

And Ryanair derives from Aer Ryan, the airline of the Ryan clan, revealing its origin.

Now go and tell Michael O'Leary he has to rebrand all his planes, logos, stationary etc from 

RyanAir  to dual branding including the equal size word AerRyan

I'd love to see the reaction you get.

I'd say you'd get a big footprint on the seat of your trousers.

Fly "AerRyan/Ryanair".

mnnn.

It is not like a large ugly dual language, confusing name on the side of a building or aircraft. Now yourself and FrancieBrady should go and tell Michael O'Leary he has to rebrand all his planes, logos, stationary etc from 

RyanAir  to dual branding including the equal size word AerRyan

I'd love to see the reaction you get.

And boards.ie will be half in Irish, and pigs will fly.

Language and culture absolutely should be supported beyond that which is profitable for one specific private company. If it was anyone bar Francie, you wouldn't for a second draw such a ridiculous line in the sand as, 'we shouldn't have dual language signs because Michael O'Leary doesn't think it would be profitable for Ryanair'.

Whatever about one's opinions on dual language signage, this is genuinely one of the most dogsh*t arguments I've seen here in a long time.

As pathetic as the clingy RyanAir stuff is, it’s not going to get the DUP out of the pickle they’ve landed themselves in by letting Bryson lead the way for them again.

Are you genuinely trying to make the argument that a private, about as internationally focused as possible company doesn't see the value in placing dual language signage on their planes that spend most of their time in other countries, therefore said language shouldn't be supported by a state body?

If you have a point beyond trying to argue with Francie and taking the opposing side to whatever SF say, then please expand on it because this current line of reasoning is beneath you. We've had our share of differing perspectives, but this is genuinely one of the most preposterously illogical, completely detached from any reasonable interpretation takes I've seen from you. You're trying to draw a comparison between the responsibilities of a government signed up to legislation to protect a language versus the responsibilities of a private company that literally operates on the basis of going to other fecking countries.

Take a deep breath, forget you're arguing with Francie and the SF perspective and try responding like a grown up.