[Holmesc1]

fishini, on 12 April 2024 - 08:56 AM, said:

Is it possible to write that post again? This time in English. My twelve year old SEN boy writes better than you.

Fook off you petty ******. Hope you understand that!

[Holmesc1]

Westbars Spireite, on 12 April 2024 - 09:58 AM, said:

He's a Geordie; it was intentional I think.

Ha ha i’m actually not, born 30 mile from there but i guess it depends how good your knowledge of the area is.

[fishini]

isleaiw1, on 12 April 2024 - 09:09 AM, said:

Its missing an r off your's but otherwise is pretty understandable... may not have appropriate capitals and punctuation, but I didnt think this was an English exam...

And of course being the parent of SEN child, you should appreciate more than most that encouragement is the key to improving and not trying to embarrass or belittle...

I think what he was trying to say is that Chris is deliberately obfuscating on the Rayner affair as she is the Deputy Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition and it would not do for him to accept she may be avoiding paying appropriate capital gains tax, refusing to declare her tax affairs whilst historically asking others to do just that..

Basically he wont accept she is a hypocrite and a tax cheat just like those he criticises.

But thanks for giving me the chance to say it all again>..

I don't usually bother. However he states he is a draughtsman, a highly skilled trade I may add. I hope his designs are easier to read than his post was.

[Holmesc1]

fishini, on 12 April 2024 - 02:15 PM, said:

I don't usually bother. However he states he is a draughtsman, a highly skilled trade I may add. I hope his designs are easier to read than his post was.

This is a message board, do i need to proof read everything before i hit send, go through some checking and approval process? My guess is you have a bee in your bonnet as i dont blow smoke up your beloved labours arce

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

isleaiw1, on 12 April 2024 - 09:09 AM, said:

Its missing an r off your's but otherwise is pretty understandable... may not have appropriate capitals and punctuation, but I didnt think this was an English exam...

And of course being the parent of SEN child, you should appreciate more than most that encouragement is the key to improving and not trying to embarrass or belittle...

I think what he was trying to say is that Chris is deliberately obfuscating on the Rayner affair as she is the Deputy Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition and it would not do for him to accept she may be avoiding paying appropriate capital gains tax, refusing to declare her tax affairs whilst historically asking others to do just that..

Basically he wont accept she is a hypocrite and a tax cheat just like those he criticises.

But thanks for giving me the chance to say it all again>..

Not very balanced of you to condemn our Ang' before any verdict, Ian.

And I'd invite you or anyone else to re-visit recent posts where I welcomed a police investigation.

Either way she's declared she'll resign if found guilty. Alongside her and her party staunchly repeating her innocence. So if the gavel falls against her fair enough - they'll all take the hit. On the other hand I hope you, the Mail-esque media, the snitchy tory MP (who was strangely silent over the catalogue of tory corruption we've so long witnessed) and everyone else leaping aboard this diversionary bandwaggon will offer a fullsome apology to both AR and the Old Bill for wasting their time if not...


Oh, and PS: it's today revealed the racist tory donor Hester recieved another three million of public funds in January via one of his companies. But hey, let's all focus on a Labour figure's fifteen hundred quid of CGT instead...

This post has been edited by The Earl of Chesterfield: 12 April 2024 - 06:34 PM

[fishini]

Holmesc1, on 12 April 2024 - 04:43 PM, said:

This is a message board, do i need to proof read everything before i hit send, go through some checking and approval process? My guess is you have a bee in your bonnet as i dont blow smoke up your beloved labours arce

Not at all I just think you are an obnoxious little xxxx

[isleaiw1]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 12 April 2024 - 06:28 PM, said:

Not very balanced of you to condemn our Ang' before any verdict, Ian.

And I'd invite you or anyone else to re-visit recent posts where I welcomed a police investigation.

Either way she's declared she'll resign if found guilty. Alongside her and her party staunchly repeating her innocence. So if the gavel falls against her fair enough - they'll all take the hit. On the other hand I hope you, the Mail-esque media, the snitchy tory MP (who was strangely silent over the catalogue of tory corruption we've so long witnessed) and everyone else leaping aboard this diversionary bandwaggon will offer a fullsome apology to both AR and the Old Bill for wasting their time if not...


Oh, and PS: it's today revealed the racist tory donor Hester recieved another three million of public funds in January via one of his companies. But hey, let's all focus on a Labour figure's fifteen hundred quid of CGT instead...

So some facts, she will step down if found guilty of a crime, good. Took her long enough to get there and why didnt SKS insist? After all, if it was the other lot, you would be screaming for it... And yes, I am jumping the gun, it seems to be the norm on here, guilty once accused...

I will apologise when I see the tax advice that allowed it - mainly so I can show my tax advisors who said exactly the opposite to me!

PS he didnt receive it, his company will have done for services rendered or goods supplied. Just because he is a racist tw*t doesnt mean the contract can be torn up and nothing delivered, how would those waiting for the goods or services survive, and of course would it be legal or would they end up spending more on legal fees and court cases and compo. You see, I doubt the contract contains a clause that says "If it turns out you are a racist tw*t we can terminate at will at no cost to us and just in case we will have a secondary supplier on tap at all times"

But dont let facts and common sense get in the way of a sensationalist claim...

And of course one is illegal, and one is a company owned by a tw*t. Be nice if neither happened. The value on tax evasion doesnt matter, its the principle...as it was when Boris had a drink in his back garden, who cares what for or how many, it was against the rules as i am sure you said at the time!

fishini, on 12 April 2024 - 07:41 PM, said:

Not at all I just think you are an obnoxious little xxxx

He may think the same but in the real world we all just rub along and accept that we cant like everyone. Dont we?

[Bobby Darling]

isleaiw1, on 12 April 2024 - 10:00 PM, said:

So some facts, she will step down if found guilty of a crime, good. Took her long enough to get there and why didnt SKS insist? After all, if it was the other lot, you would be screaming for it... And yes, I am jumping the gun, it seems to be the norm on here, guilty once accused...

I will apologise when I see the tax advice that allowed it - mainly so I can show my tax advisors who said exactly the opposite to me!

PS he didnt receive it, his company will have done for services rendered or goods supplied. Just because he is a racist tw*t doesnt mean the contract can be torn up and nothing delivered, how would those waiting for the goods or services survive, and of course would it be legal or would they end up spending more on legal fees and court cases and compo. You see, I doubt the contract contains a clause that says "If it turns out you are a racist tw*t we can terminate at will at no cost to us and just in case we will have a secondary supplier on tap at all times"

But dont let facts and common sense get in the way of a sensationalist claim...

And of course one is illegal, and one is a company owned by a tw*t. Be nice if neither happened. The value on tax evasion doesnt matter, its the principle...as it was when Boris had a drink in his back garden, who cares what for or how many, it was against the rules as i am sure you said at the time!



He may think the same but in the real world we all just rub along and accept that we cant like everyone. Dont we?

You still haven’t attempted to give closure. What happened back in the day? Why so anti Labour and the Unions? What destroyed any pretence of political objectivity? I’m genuinely interested. I know it’s personal but you post so frequently, in and out of your working hours, that as an employer I’m fascinated. How do you balance both balls?

[fishini]

Bobby Darling, on 12 April 2024 - 10:40 PM, said:

You still haven’t attempted to give closure. What happened back in the day? Why so anti Labour and the Unions? What destroyed any pretence of political objectivity? I’m genuinely interested. I know it’s personal but you post so frequently, in and out of your working hours, that as an employer I’m fascinated. How do you balance both balls?

He says he doesn't like the Tories. However I do not believe him, if he said water was wet I wouldn't believe him. He is IMO just like a Tory, a low person in a high place.

[Search & Destroy]

fishini, on 13 April 2024 - 06:24 AM, said:

He says he doesn't like the Tories. However I do not believe him, if he said water was wet I wouldn't believe him. He is IMO just like a Tory, a low person in a high place.

Interestingly there is strong belief that water isn’t actually wet

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

isleaiw1, on 12 April 2024 - 10:00 PM, said:

So some facts, she will step down if found guilty of a crime, good. Took her long enough to get there and why didnt SKS insist? After all, if it was the other lot, you would be screaming for it... And yes, I am jumping the gun, it seems to be the norm on here, guilty once accused...

I will apologise when I see the tax advice that allowed it - mainly so I can show my tax advisors who said exactly the opposite to me!

PS he didnt receive it, his company will have done for services rendered or goods supplied. Just because he is a racist tw*t doesnt mean the contract can be torn up and nothing delivered, how would those waiting for the goods or services survive, and of course would it be legal or would they end up spending more on legal fees and court cases and compo. You see, I doubt the contract contains a clause that says "If it turns out you are a racist tw*t we can terminate at will at no cost to us and just in case we will have a secondary supplier on tap at all times"

But dont let facts and common sense get in the way of a sensationalist claim...

And of course one is illegal, and one is a company owned by a tw*t. Be nice if neither happened. The value on tax evasion doesnt matter, its the principle...as it was when Boris had a drink in his back garden, who cares what for or how many, it was against the rules as i am sure you said at the time!



He may think the same but in the real world we all just rub along and accept that we cant like everyone. Dont we?

Okay Ian, facts: we've already had 'hamster wheel' style exchanges addressing your double standards in terms of what you demand from SKS and Tory leaders.

In the same way you parroted Mail-esque media mania over historical accusations whilst dismissing the racist's situation in a 'He's a tw*t but apologised, no more to see here, so it's fine for him to still receive public millions whilst the Tories still receive his filthy funding' kinda way.

Fact: you found the deputy Labour leader guilty before any decision has been made, yet now try to dismiss that post by blaming some sorta messageboard culture.

Fact: even though she's magnanimously stated she'll quit if proven to've broken laws - whilst, by extension, the party standing by her will also suffer political embarrassment - you refuse to be equally magnanimous and apologise if she hasn't (which of course the Tories and right wing platforms will never, ever do either).

So of course we 'rub along'. You, me, and all but the disturbingly deranged using this forum. But please stop claiming any sorta 'balance' when pretty much your every post proves otherwise...

Oh, and PS: as shown on last neet's 'HIGNFY' every Tory of whom Angie Raynor's called to resign was forced to, when faced with evidence, erm, resign...

This post has been edited by The Earl of Chesterfield: 13 April 2024 - 08:29 AM

[fishini]

Search & Destroy, on 13 April 2024 - 07:33 AM, said:

Interestingly there is strong belief that water isn’t actually wet

Maybe true. So I will rephrase it. If he said water makes things wet I wouldn't believe him.

[isleaiw1]

Bobby Darling, on 12 April 2024 - 10:40 PM, said:

You still haven’t attempted to give closure. What happened back in the day? Why so anti Labour and the Unions? What destroyed any pretence of political objectivity? I’m genuinely interested. I know it’s personal but you post so frequently, in and out of your working hours, that as an employer I’m fascinated. How do you balance both balls?

You clearly cant read as I have explained my position a million times, and you keep coming back with no real answer except its me...

If she has broken the law, do you agree that is a terrible thing for someone in such a prestigious position and sets a dreadful example to everyone else? Or is it OK as the profit was only £48k which at 28% tax is well over £10k....

As for the last bit, I work very long hours and am not constrained to 9 to 5... and being an enlightened employer I judge others and myself by my outputs not the hours I am on the clock. You should try it...

[isleaiw1]

fishini, on 13 April 2024 - 06:24 AM, said:

He says he doesn't like the Tories. However I do not believe him, if he said water was wet I wouldn't believe him. He is IMO just like a Tory, a low person in a high place.

Personal again. So another fact, I dont insult people. I dont scoff at others. I'd say that makes me a better person. Maybe you are the Tory, saying one thing and doing another....

I dont need to prove to you, I know what matters to me. I just find it amusing how some people can only see bad in one and only see good in the other, I think most politicians are egotistical, unprincipled selfish idiots.

[isleaiw1]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 13 April 2024 - 08:00 AM, said:

Okay Ian, facts: we've already had 'hamster wheel' style exchanges addressing your double standards in terms of what you demand from SKS and Tory leaders.

In the same way you parroted Mail-esque media mania over historical accusations whilst dismissing the racist's situation in a 'He's a tw*t but apologised, no more to see here, so it's fine for him to still receive public millions whilst the Tories still receive his filthy funding' kinda way.

Fact: you found the deputy Labour leader guilty before any decision has been made, yet now try to dismiss that post by blaming some sorta messageboard culture.

Fact: even though she's magnanimously stated she'll quit if proven to've broken laws - whilst, by extension, the party standing by her will also suffer political embarrassment - you refuse to be equally magnanimous and apologise if she hasn't (which of course the Tories and right wing platforms will never, ever do either).

So of course we 'rub along'. You, me, and all but the disturbingly deranged using this forum. But please stop claiming any sorta 'balance' when pretty much your every post proves otherwise...

Oh, and PS: as shown on last neet's 'HIGNFY' every Tory of whom Angie Raynor's called to resign was forced to, when faced with evidence, erm, resign...

Here you go Chris, if she is is innocent and we can see how she managed to have 2 PPRs I will come on here and apologise to you and her.

But you have to understand that having studied tax, sold a house and paid CGT, and knowing a couple who lived in separate houses but were happily married and still told they couldnt have 2 PPRs, I find it hard to believe...

My aim is to provide balance to some of your postings, which means of course that mine are as balanced as yours! There are two sides to every argument, but the trouble with being blinkered (which being a member of the party means you must be because you have to see the Labour side) is you forget it might actually not be quite correct

And on the last point, I wonder if she would have called on herself to resign if the boot was on the other party... and if she will indeed have to, erm, resign....

fishini, on 13 April 2024 - 08:04 AM, said:

Maybe true. So I will rephrase it. If he said water makes things wet I wouldn't believe him.

To be fair though, you only believe what has been ingrained in you since you were a kid.... just in case you hadnt spotted the world isnt flat....

[Goku]

I suspect this is a huge nothingburger given she’s said she’ll step down if she’s found guilty of any wrongdoing, she wouldn’t do that otherwise.

[fishini]

isleaiw1, on 13 April 2024 - 09:40 AM, said:

Here you go Chris, if she is is innocent and we can see how she managed to have 2 PPRs I will come on here and apologise to you and her.

But you have to understand that having studied tax, sold a house and paid CGT, and knowing a couple who lived in separate houses but were happily married and still told they couldnt have 2 PPRs, I find it hard to believe...

My aim is to provide balance to some of your postings, which means of course that mine are as balanced as yours! There are two sides to every argument, but the trouble with being blinkered (which being a member of the party means you must be because you have to see the Labour side) is you forget it might actually not be quite correct

And on the last point, I wonder if she would have called on herself to resign if the boot was on the other party... and if she will indeed have to, erm, resign....



To be fair though, you only believe what has been ingrained in you since you were a kid.... just in case you hadnt spotted the world isnt flat....

Just the same as most people. So you are saying the world isn't flat? Since when? 😁

[Bobby Darling]

isleaiw1, on 13 April 2024 - 09:31 AM, said:

You clearly cant read as I have explained my position a million times, and you keep coming back with no real answer except its me...

If she has broken the law, do you agree that is a terrible thing for someone in such a prestigious position and sets a dreadful example to everyone else? Or is it OK as the profit was only £48k which at 28% tax is well over £10k....

As for the last bit, I work very long hours and am not constrained to 9 to 5... and being an enlightened employer I judge others and myself by my outputs not the hours I am on the clock. You should try it...

Good answer. But you’re not the “employer” are you? I do try it? I get output but a little bit more concentration on the job might increase that? I’d at least ask you about focus. Output is not finite. If she has broken the law, and fibbed, she should definitely resign. Won’t impact the polls or the outcome. It sounds a bit dodgy to me.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

So whilst they and their massed ranks of media mates spent day after day desperately attempting to smear Angie Raynor, tory central knew full well about this?

https://www.bbc.co.u...litics-68841840

Y'know, the Angie Raynor even the bloke snitching on her couldn't be clear what she'd supposedly done: https://m.youtube.co...h?v=pgNpEJ3NGU0

Though that didn't stop today's stooge, going by the name of Shapps this week, from trying to mention her name nearly as often he mentioned the word "plan" whilst touring the studios this morning. Until... https://m.youtube.co...h?v=BppeoaD_3p4

(By the way, gotta laugh at the strategically placed flag and MoD nameplate. Just to remind everyone how important this former get-rich-quick scheme salesman now is, of course.)

All of which leaves a very simple question - why did it take a paper revealing this latest tory sleaze for the party's so called leader to act....?

This post has been edited by The Earl of Chesterfield: 18 April 2024 - 04:10 PM

[isleaiw1]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 18 April 2024 - 04:00 PM, said:

So whilst they and their massed ranks of media mates spent day after day desperately attempting to smear Angie Raynor, tory central knew full well about this?

https://www.bbc.co.u...litics-68841840

Y'know, the Angie Raynor even the bloke snitching on her couldn't be clear what she'd supposedly done: https://m.youtube.co...h?v=pgNpEJ3NGU0

Though that didn't stop today's stooge, going by the name of Shapps this week, from trying to mention her name nearly as often he mentioned the word "plan" whilst touring the studios this morning. Until... https://m.youtube.co...h?v=BppeoaD_3p4

(By the way, gotta laugh at the strategically placed flag and MoD nameplate. Just to remind everyone how important this former get-rich-quick scheme salesman now is, of course.)

All of which leaves a very simple question - why did it take a paper revealing this latest tory sleaze for the party's so called leader to act....?

Yep, all as bad as each other. One uses party funds, one uses tax payer funds (if that is either is found guilty of wrong doing). One has had the whip removed, one hasnt....

On the Rayner front I am losing track of what she has done, it could be electoral register issues, or capital gains tax issues, or maybe council tax issues.... or all three.