New pic of Bono at court in Dublin

[u2granny]

And as a stylist, she should know that.

More proof that u2granny deserved the job more that she did.

Indeed. I am free until the middle of August.

 

[tbird]

So did Larry take the stand? Given his apprehension toward interviews I wonder how he would do while being examined by a tough barrister? The vein on the temple of his forehead may burst!!

 

[kellyahern]

So did Larry take the stand? Given his apprehension toward interviews I wonder how he would do while being examined by a tough barrister? The vein on the temple of his forehead may burst!!

No, I don't think he did.

 

[U2dork]

Just a little observation... Isn't that the same shirt he wore in the Streets video?
He was also wearing this shirt when I met him in 1991...

 

[LostAtMoon]

Indeed. I am free until the middle of August.

If you get it don't forget about us and bring us some pictures . I'm sure you can do better than Lola.

 

[u2granny]

If you get it don't forget about us and bring us some pictures . I'm sure you can do better than Lola.

I'll have color polaroids.

 

[LostAtMoon]

Just a little observation... Isn't that the same shirt he wore in the Streets video?
He was also wearing this shirt when I met him in 1991...

It looks like it:

 

[sraphim]

what goes around comes around.
I'm sure both Bono and Larry kicked her a$$

 

[kellyahern]

Oh my God, how cute, he looks like Reservoir Dogs gets confirmed!

I love that description.

 

[senrab]

This picture cracks me up. Larry with his binder :rofl:

 

[financeguy]

One of the headlines in the tabloids over here was "U2 sue sylist over €200 hat" and above it "U2 worth €200million" (or whatever the figure is).

They have a point in fairness.

 

[one4u2]

I think he stole Bonos shoes

 

[MattFromNYC]

i guess no one wants to answer my question...

 

[u2bonogirl]

when mentioned that she states that the band wants complete control of their image and make up a whole thing of how they want the public to percieve them... what was meant by that? that they are good old christian, valued boys? or what?
i cant see how damaging a few pics of them running around in underwear.. drunk out of their minds.. or whatever can be.. especially nowadays.. (theres quite a few pics out there like that now.. and we all know about the drunkeness.. which if anything could come across good for them.. ).

is she saying that the band and how we see the band... is totally not what really is? theyre all putting on a completely different face?

to answer your question
I dont think U2 is terribly worried about self effacing pictures of themselves. Its the sense of justice that this lady shouldnt be acting like a two year old

 

[u2bonogirl]

I think he stole Bonos shoes

Larry has been wearing those for a while now!
We just dont poke fun at him as often as we do dear Bono

 

[labell]

Oh no he doesn't just stop greasing it back! But I'm so happy to finally be rid of those hideous greased spikes he wore for years I'll take it! Bono seems to have cut his hair, it's shorter, that's not good! I want it LONG when I see him in October (if I can get tickets if not I'm hanging around outside MCI center to see him anyway!!)

MCi center? that's where I'll be

 

[GracelandHarley]

One of the headlines in the tabloids over here was "U2 sue sylist over €200 hat" and above it "U2 worth €200million" (or whatever the figure is).

They have a point in fairness.

No, in FAIRNESS, it's quite the opposite. You are confusing dollar amounts and the principle of fairness, and those two have no corollation at all, my friend.

U2 are suing the backstabbing b**ch for a reason... nothing at all to do with money! It's the principle-- she lied, betrayed, and tried to publicly cheat them.. for her own (unearned) gain.


In almost thirty years of their existence, she's the ONLY one who has tried to cash in on her ties to them! Speaks volumes on her character and motive, IMO...

 

[blueeyedgirl]

No, on the contrary, it speaks volumes about the nature of the U2 organisation. They are huge monolith going after a minnow (shades of Starbucks going after the local coffee shop and wiping them out). Why are they going after her now? They've known she's had this stuff for 20 years. The organisation/management have huge control over U2's public image and NOTHING gets out. Why did nothing about Adam's episode during Zoo Sydney get out until the Flanagan book for an example? (The Flanagan book being an officially sanctioned book BTW).

No, the timing to me speaks more about that Bono is now a Nobel Prize nominee, he talks to presidents, he's not just a rock star anymore. And "embarrassing Polaroids" are just not allowed.

My estimation of the U2 organisation has really gone downhill, not that anyone gives a fuck what I think anyway.

 

[financeguy]

No, the timing to me speaks more about that Bono is now a Nobel Prize nominee, he talks to presidents, he's not just a rock star anymore. And "embarrassing Polaroids" are just not allowed.

I think this is what is called hitting the nail on the head.

 

[biff]

No, on the contrary, it speaks volumes about the nature of the U2 organisation. They are huge monolith going after a minnow (shades of Starbucks going after the local coffee shop and wiping them out). Why are they going after her now? They've known she's had this stuff for 20 years. The organisation/management have huge control over U2's public image and NOTHING gets out. Why did nothing about Adam's episode during Zoo Sydney get out until the Flanagan book for an example? (The Flanagan book being an officially sanctioned book BTW).

No, the timing to me speaks more about that Bono is now a Nobel Prize nominee, he talks to presidents, he's not just a rock star anymore. And "embarrassing Polaroids" are just not allowed.

My estimation of the U2 organisation has really gone downhill, not that anyone gives a fuck what I think anyway.

Well, perhaps it does speak volumes about the U2 organization, but in a different way. This "organization" is made up of people who have worked with the band for ages, in many/most cases since they were kids. They are surrounded by people who have shown themselves to be extremely loyal. There is obviously a reason for this, which we have heard from these indvidiuals again and again: The band are great people to work with/for, and well- deserving of the loyalty. Amongst all these dozens of people, Cashman stands out. Unlike anyone else you can name, she was dismissed from the ranks very quickly (not kept on for ages; this speaks volumes.) And unlike others, she blabbed (although she had nothing really bad to say). In this framework, how do you think she stands out to the band? As someone who was a poor employee (just read her own book, where she comes across very badly indeed, even in her own words) and as disloyal and un-committed to the organization. They've managed to establish a really solid group of working people over the last two decades, almost a family. I'm not sure why you think this timing speaks about Bono being a Nobel nominee; it's at least the third nomination. That's a non sequiter. The concept of "embarrassing" polaroids is purely (albeit fun) speculation.
Ultimately, I think it seems to comes down to hurt feelings of betrayal, and genuine anger.

 

[GracelandHarley]

No, on the contrary, it speaks volumes about the nature of the U2 organisation. They are huge monolith going after a minnow (shades of Starbucks going after the local coffee shop and wiping them out). Why are they going after her now? They've known she's had this stuff for 20 years. The organisation/management have huge control over U2's public image and NOTHING gets out. Why did nothing about Adam's episode during Zoo Sydney get out until the Flanagan book for an example? (The Flanagan book being an officially sanctioned book BTW).

No, the timing to me speaks more about that Bono is now a Nobel Prize nominee, he talks to presidents, he's not just a rock star anymore. And "embarrassing Polaroids" are just not allowed.

My estimation of the U2 organisation has really gone downhill, not that anyone gives a fuck what I think anyway.

No, you're input and thoughts are always appreciated, that's what we are all here for!

However, I will correct the record, as stated above (or below, I forget where it will appear) if need be... they are NOT "going after" her now because she just stirred the "pot" (would have said "shit" myself) in the past few months...

U2 has never pursued nor indicted the indivdual "artistic" pursuitsand/or inclinations of anyone in their employ. Thirty years on would more than enough proof for anyone that the greatest band in the world !!! doesn't have to prove itself to the fucking bleeping circuit court of Ireland, much less to to the rest of the world.

She clearly crossed THE line with the this band... and has been the ONLY one in the history of the band to do so! Yet she seems to have nothing of value to say? It's the principle of the thing with U2... they don't care about the details...

 

[blueeyedgirl]

Oh come on, how big is the U2 organisation? They've had how many people work for them over the years? How many have left and have said nothing in the press? It may well be because they were happy with their work and the employers, I don't doubt that at all. However they're going after the one who spoke out, and didn't suck up to them, with both barrels.

She's rocking the boat, don't you see? She's not toeing the party line. Stalin had more compassion than the U2 organisation.

 

[bono_man2002]

Guy Ponting: Does He Know He doest have his Wig on?
Bono : Shhhh Its in my pocket!

....Sorry...couldnt resist!

 

[financeguy]

Oh come on, how big is the U2 organisation? They've had how many people work for them over the years?

Exactly, I'm sure countless people have worked for the U2 organisation over the years.

In terms of people that were once part of the inner circle and now seemingly aren't, what about Ossie Kilkenny?

According to the Sunday Times, they weren't happy with the financial performance he was getting on their investments, so they ditched him.

 

[financeguy]

Maybe it's the short guy complex, you know the way Lola Cashman seemingly revealed that he wears specially constructed boots in public?

Maybe that's what disturbed Paul Hewson's fragile ego.

 

[biff]

Stalin had more compassion than the U2 organisation.

Do you have any idea how completely vile that remark is? Do you actually know what Stalin did, and how many millions of deaths he was responsible for?

Back to reality, she was clearly a bad employee from very early on. Have you actually read her book? Even she couldn't disguise the fact that she was negligent. "Toeing the party line"? I don't think so, because she never did.
I'm curious why are you so inflamed about this, and so convinced that U2 are being monsters?

 

[xaviMF22]

blueeyedgirl I completely agree with you.

 

[biff]

According to the Sunday Times, they weren't happy with the financial performance he was getting on their investments, so they ditched him.

Not quite right. They ditched him because of serious financial irregularities.

 

[financeguy]

Not quite right. They ditched him because of serious financial irregularities.

I'll be honest.

I know people that know Ossie Kilkenny.

I wouldn't throw round an insinuation like that, unless you can back it up.

Cheers!

 

[biff]

Maybe it's the short guy complex, you know the way Lola Cashman seemingly revealed that he wears specially constructed boots in public?

"Seemingly" is the appropriate word, as opposed to really, since he's always worn high-heeled shoes. Was anyone actually surprised by that "revelation"? His insecurity about his height is well-known.