by Compo's Hat » 15 May 2010 23:48
by Royal Rother » 16 May 2010 08:10
by Arnie_Pie » 16 May 2010 08:56
by Zammo » 16 May 2010 08:57
by Jerry St Clair » 16 May 2010 09:15
by PieEater » 16 May 2010 10:03
by Royal Rother » 16 May 2010 10:17
by Urinal Mint » 16 May 2010 10:57
by exileinleeds » 16 May 2010 11:02
by ZacNaloen » 16 May 2010 11:17
by Royal Rother » 16 May 2010 11:48
by Royal Rother » 16 May 2010 11:52
exileinleeds Great timing from the Mail.![]()
A quick resignation, and explanation that a vain and stupid man tried to impress some bimbo treat it, and her, with the contempt deserved. Grovelling appology that of course no one thinks there is the remotest chance these ramblings have any foundation in truth.
by ZacNaloen » 16 May 2010 11:56
Royal Rother NOTW would have given it far more sensitive treatment eh?
(Actually, that's be the 1st place to go with this story, so maybe they turned it down the the national interest....?)
Just a thought!
by Seal » 16 May 2010 21:33
by Ian Royal » 16 May 2010 21:36
by Dirk Gently » 16 May 2010 21:39
by Dirk Gently » 16 May 2010 23:08
by Jackson Corner » 16 May 2010 23:46
by Silver Fox » 17 May 2010 00:17
Dirk Gently Interesting counter-argument here : http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article7128203.ece
by Barry the bird boggler » 17 May 2010 10:24
Users browsing this forum: BRO_BOT and 79 guests