SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,597
They won't, because if he has nothing to lose and no money he'll just sell his story. He has 60+ years of dirt, it doesn't matter if it's legal or not. They won't want their privacy eroding like that so he'll be protected.
 

Yoni

Cockb@dger / Klotehommel www.lhw.photography
Joined
Dec 11, 2003
Messages
5,036
Maybe just maybe he is thinking about his kids and grandkids - It is not unheard of. As for Charlie, he has had most of his laundry dangled in the public eye so I do not believe he has much left to hide.
I suspect Andrew will ’commit suicide’ If he threatens the crowns secrets…
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,409
I think the Royal Family *needs* Andrew to have some sort of serious punishment.
Or at least the appearance of serious punishment.

Look at what the press has been doing the rounds of. "He's lost this palace and now has to live in this palace!" then, "Oh noes! he's been demoted from this palace to this mahoosive stately home!!", then "he's no longer allowed to be called Sir Mc Princey Mc Cuntass", then "he's losing his (official) income".... all utter utter bullshit.

They won't, because if he has nothing to lose and no money he'll just sell his story. He has 60+ years of dirt, it doesn't matter if it's legal or not. They won't want their privacy eroding like that so he'll be protected.
He's got no money on paper, that he's legally obliged to talk about. But he's fucking minted, is at legal risk of losing fuck all - apart from his dignity, but then he doesn't care one jot about how the plebs see him - and neither do his many and varied friends.

Maybe just maybe he is thinking about his kids and grandkids - It is not unheard of.
That's why the performative shit's been going on for ages. Even if he gets found guilty of something (lol, like there'll be a real trial) then at worst he'll spend some time in a variety of ski lodges.


We need to get shot of the royal family. They're a cancer. The very idea of a royal family is a cancer.
 

Yoni

Cockb@dger / Klotehommel www.lhw.photography
Joined
Dec 11, 2003
Messages
5,036
Yet the Royals can do a lot of good (I am not a royalist) in the same way USAID did a lot for the US.
I think the UK should think twice before taking more actions that reduce its influence in the world.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,409
If you're comfortable with a class of UK citizen that sits above the law then that's a strange one.

Make them fully subject to it - rather than the financial and legal beneficiaries of a murderous family past, then maybe, just maybe, that could be a thing.

We gain more than we lose by chopping their heads clean off. For a start - when we sell rights to build wind farms off the UK coast, 25% of the proceeds wouldn't go to the crown...
 

Raven

Fuck the Tories!
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
45,535
I think it should exist, but be chopped back a hell of a lot.

But they should certainly be accountable, and far more transparent.
 
Last edited:

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,409
Suspended sentence seems odd.
Because the experienced mountaineer judge said his only lapse was failing to recognise much earlier on that she was not going to make it.

Stupid law. Her own parents said the trial infantilised her memory.

Why are you so eager to see him jailed?
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,409
Crying and screaming. Every time it gets hard. Tempted to walk away every time the o/h does that when she's tired on a hike, mountain bike, kayak, swim, whatever.

Best course of action is to walk away because they stop blaming you for how they feel, suck it up and start moving again.

Funny how that seems to be quite a common trait in both women and children ;)
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,810
I think there's a difference doing this on like a normal walk and then there's doing it on a mountain, no?
I think there's a difference for her, but women are always irritated by (larger, longer stride) men walking faster than them, and such a feeling would be massively heightened in this type of circumstance. What's missing from this conversation is did she catch up or did he return or stop and wait? After all, she got back down the mountain with him.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,409
I think there's a difference doing this on like a normal walk and then there's doing it on a mountain, no?
Maybe they shouldn't strop, scream, whine and rage and be more constructive when they're tired.

Never has a man done that, ever. He'd make a call, and turn back, leaving others to go on, or ask for a pause and a rest. If he did, he'd be out of friends quickly.

Who'd have thought you'd be so sexist! Women aren't capable of being personally responsible, eh?
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,409
You keep making ghe assertion that he's obviously responsible for her. And expressed surprise/disappointment that he's not in clinky because he didn't keep her safe.

I mean, it's clear you've never walked up a mountain with yer girlfriend. I've been up loads with various. The ones that don'r scream and shout are keepers. :)
 

Raven

Fuck the Tories!
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
45,535
I've been eating pretty much zero carbs lately. Just demolished a pack of crispy potato slices from Sainsbury's veg section. Loads of salt and pepper added, air fried. Proper food high.
 

BloodOmen

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
18,460
Orange man just got rinsed by the supreme court

"Under the international emergency economic powers act of 1977 Donald Trump does not have the authority to impose Tariffs"

Bet he's absolutely fuming
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,810
Orange man just got rinsed by the supreme court

"Under the international emergency economic powers act of 1977 Donald Trump does not have the authority to impose Tariffs"

Bet he's absolutely fuming

Or...he knows tariffs aren't working and are actually tanking the economy. Now he can go "I wanted to carry on but it was the SC who stopped me, what a bunch of losers", rinse and repeat. He owns the Supreme Court, I don't trust anything that comes from them.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,409
Or...he knows tariffs aren't working and are actually tanking the economy. Now he can go "I wanted to carry on but it was the SC who stopped me, what a bunch of losers", rinse and repeat. He owns the Supreme Court, I don't trust anything that comes from them.
It's a bit extreme to say you don't trust the supreme court. They still take their roles seriously, despite the ridiculous levels of partisanship - and they ruled against Trump. It's not some conspiracy for him to do that (although he surely will - it's the obvious political play).

The long term projections aren't great, for whatever value we put on projections. But it's not "tanking" right now. But tarrifs aren't about making a better economy. They're about forcing renegotiation. They're a strategy for that, not for building a better economy.

Dropping them post renegotiation works in the US's favour.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,810
It's a bit extreme to say you don't trust the supreme court. They still take their roles seriously, despite the ridiculous levels of partisanship - and they ruled against Trump. It's not some conspiracy for him to do that (although he surely will - it's the obvious political play).

The long term projections aren't great, for whatever value we put on projections. But it's not "tanking" right now. But tarrifs aren't about making a better economy. They're about forcing renegotiation. They're a strategy for that, not for building a better economy.

Dropping them post renegotiation works in the US's favour.
All the analysis is that the imports of raw materials that were stockpiled by US manufacturers last year are about to run out. There's also the problem that after initial panic, countries aren't blinking any more, the Orange Gibbon is increasingly finding his threats are empty.

And no, I don't trust the Supreme Court in the slightest. I don't think I trust any US institutions any more, but the SC is demonstrably full of graft; Thomas, Gorsuch and Alito are all dodgy as fuck and they're just the ones who've been found out, and in any sane country they'd be disbarred and probably locked up.
 

caLLous

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
18,713
Kavanaugh's excuse for dissenting was piss-weak as well. Basically "it'll be too difficult to sort refunds out" as if that's got anything to do with whether or not the tariffs were legal.
 

BloodOmen

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
18,460
634928566_4061554000656088_8303842589518926855_n.jpg
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,409
The Royal Family are said to be devastated after Prince Andrew’s car crash next Wednesday
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom