• 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!

Reply to: No sweat!

Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "No sweat!"

Collapse

  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post

    Which shows he's an arrogant privileged twerp...
    Maybe we should just get rid of the courts, who needs them when middle-class Karens can make emphatic decisions without needing things like evidence.

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post

    Admit to what? He has not accepted anything happened he needs to admit to.
    Which shows he's an arrogant privileged twerp...

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by malvolio View Post

    If he wasn't such an arrogant privileged twerp he could have admitted to everything at the outset in private and offered to support her charity effort. Then he wouldn't have caused the damage he has done, both to himself, his family and the rest of the country.
    Admit to what? He has not accepted anything happened he needs to admit to.

    Leave a comment:


  • malvolio
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    Surely it's in the taxpayers' interest to avoid having our royal family dragged through the courts internationally.
    If he wasn't such an arrogant privileged twerp he could have admitted to everything at the outset in private and offered to support her charity effort. Then he wouldn't have caused the damage he has done, both to himself, his family and the rest of the country.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Surely it's in the taxpayers' interest to avoid having our royal family dragged through the courts internationally.

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by NigelJK View Post

    How is it that when Boris & Co splurge £B's, on PPE and the like, it's not taxpayers money but is Boris saving our lives but when the Queen spends her money, supplemented by the Public purse for her duties, it's taxpayers money?
    Where haven't I agreed or stated that Boris Johnson giving his chums money for PPE etc isn't taxpayers money?

    The worse thing about Boris Johnson et al is they make the monarchy look relevant...

    ​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • Zigenare
    replied
    Originally posted by NigelJK View Post

    How is it that when Boris & Co splurge £B's, on PPE and the like, it's not taxpayers money but is Boris saving our lives but when the Queen spends her money, supplemented by the Public purse for her duties, it's taxpayers money?
    Because this forum counts one or two rather vocal raving lefties amongst its membership.

    Leave a comment:


  • NigelJK
    replied
    Least us taxpayers save money.
    How is it that when Boris & Co splurge £B's, on PPE and the like, it's not taxpayers money but is Boris saving our lives but when the Queen spends her money, supplemented by the Public purse for her duties, it's taxpayers money?

    Leave a comment:


  • malvolio
    replied
    Originally posted by quackhandle View Post

    From what I have read (palace spokesperson and all that) is that Charlie, Anne and Eddie + William are proper apoplectic with all this bad press, friends with convicted sex offender, so once Lizzie goes it may well be something like that. Andy gets banished forever, return the Dukedom, go back to living with Fergie, etc.


    qh
    You might not have noticed, but Andrew has already been banished. No royal duties, no title (at least, not one that means anything), no inclusion is state events and minimum income from the Royal List. He would be better off moving to Montecinto...

    Leave a comment:


  • quackhandle
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post

    So when Charles becomes King, Andrew goes to the Tower or otherwise disappears? Least us taxpayers save money.
    From what I have read (palace spokesperson and all that) is that Charlie, Anne and Eddie + William are proper apoplectic with all this bad press, friends with convicted sex offender, so once Lizzie goes it may well be something like that. Andy gets banished forever, return the Dukedom, go back to living with Fergie, etc.


    qh

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post

    OJ Simpson lost civil case (pretty sure he was happy to settle it) and that pretty much bankrupted him and ultimately helped him get actual prison sentence, albeit for other crimes.
    So when Charles becomes King, Andrew goes to the Tower or otherwise disappears? Least us taxpayers save money.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by SimonMac View Post
    It's a civil case, there can be no justice or guilt apportioned, the only outcome from a civil case ever is money
    OJ Simpson lost civil case (pretty sure he was happy to settle it) and that pretty much bankrupted him and ultimately helped him get actual prison sentence, albeit for other crimes.

    Leave a comment:


  • SimonMac
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    Weird that lady finds that a big payout makes up for her 'abuse', rather than, say, bringing a guilty man to justice.
    It's a civil case, there can be no justice or guilt apportioned, the only outcome from a civil case ever is money

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by Zigenare View Post
    You do know what a "harlot" is, don't you? "She wasn't a hardened harlot by then"...
    I know what it means, so I said she wasn't a prostitute then and she probably isn't now. I know very little about the lady.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zigenare
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    I wasn't suggesting she was a prostitute like you and whatever you do don't accept any invites from WTFH!

    The girl was abused, possibly by Randy Andy (with his knowledge ) she saw a hell of a pay day now and sensibly took it.
    You do know what a "harlot" is, don't you? "She wasn't a hardened harlot by then"...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X