• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Wine Time Friday

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post

    Aren't we suppose to be talking about microfibre filters for washing machines?
    And EVIL PRINCE HARRY (not Randy Andy, but the one who married an American), who wants to pay for police protection when he comes to the UK.
    Disgusting.
    …Maybe we ain’t that young anymore

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by WTFH View Post
      I thought the instructions were to move on from that and on to cancelling the BBC?

      Anyway, here's when the S*n first ran the story:
      https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/148264...oor-gathering/

      But it had to be regurgitated to try to deflect.
      Don't you hate it when the papers dredge up things that happened a year ago for political purposes?
      Originally posted by MaryPoppins
      I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
      Originally posted by vetran
      Urine is quite nourishing

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by d000hg View Post

        Don't you hate it when the papers dredge up things that happened a year ago for political purposes?
        You mean repeating old stories that they ran?

        How long before the Mail re-runs one or their old ones?
        …Maybe we ain’t that young anymore

        Comment


          #34
          How is it worse to refer to a past story than to deliberately suppress it until the opportune time? Surely past stories are always getting 'dredged up' as they become pertinent to recent news - as a timely example when Djokovic said he was not pro-vaccine in 2020 it made the news briefly, but now that story is being re-linked to every update on his current story?
          Originally posted by MaryPoppins
          I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
          Originally posted by vetran
          Urine is quite nourishing

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by d000hg View Post
            How is it worse to refer to a past story than to deliberately suppress it until the opportune time? Surely past stories are always getting 'dredged up' as they become pertinent to recent news - as a timely example when Djokovic said he was not pro-vaccine in 2020 it made the news briefly, but now that story is being re-linked to every update on his current story?
            There's a difference between deliberately suppressing a story until an opportune time and having a government that shows so much contempt for UK citizens that you have to run more than one story per day about their failures and corruption.

            Here's a few about the early days of Covid-19
            https://bylinetimes.com/2020/07/13/t...lies-unmasked/
            …Maybe we ain’t that young anymore

            Comment


              #36
              Or if you just want to focus on "Big Dog"...
              https://boris-johnson-lies.com
              …Maybe we ain’t that young anymore

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by WTFH View Post

                And EVIL PRINCE HARRY (not Randy Andy, but the one who married an American), who wants to pay for police protection when he comes to the UK.
                Disgusting.
                Another example of a biased non-story. It's not about the money. If he is visiting the Royal Family over here, he and any of his family will be covered by the usual protection team. What he's asking for is royal protection for any private (i.e. outside the royal family) visits or "work" he may undertake. For that, quite rightly, the police are saying he should pay for his own people, not try and divert theirs. Not their problem if his people can't arrest UK citizens, carry firearms or access the PNC data.
                Blog? What blog...?

                Comment


                  #38
                  Originally posted by WTFH View Post
                  And EVIL PRINCE HARRY (not Randy Andy, but the one who married an American), who wants to pay for police protection when he comes to the UK. Disgusting.
                  UK police is not rent-a-cop...



                  Comment


                    #39
                    Originally posted by malvolio View Post
                    Another example of a biased non-story. It's not about the money. If he is visiting the Royal Family over here, he and any of his family will be covered by the usual protection team. What he's asking for is royal protection for any private (i.e. outside the royal family) visits or "work" he may undertake. For that, quite rightly, the police are saying he should pay for his own people, not try and divert theirs. Not their problem if his people can't arrest UK citizens, carry firearms or access the PNC data.


                    Can't believe i am agreeing with mal... somebody hacked his account?

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Originally posted by WTFH View Post
                      Or if you just want to focus on "Big Dog"...
                      https://boris-johnson-lies.com
                      Seems like a tiny street dog

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X