Dishonoured again

[Tone]

I note that I have been missed off the New Year's Honours List yet again.

Don't thy realise that I have just survived nine days at the X^4's?

If that dozen deserve a gong, what does?

Tone

[Nick Odell]

Sorry you missed out again this time, Tone. But what really thrills me
is that, apart from the performers and the politicians and the other
usual suspects there are some youngsters on the list this year. Just
eleven and twelve years old and already they have done the most
magnificent things. The future can't be as bad as all that with
incredible kids like them around.


Nick

[Nicholas D. Richards]

In article <sqt5h7$ist$1...@dont-email.me>, Tone <em...@address.com> on
Sun, 2 Jan 2022 at 21:30:15 awoke Nicholas from his slumbers and wrote

>I note that I have been missed off the New Year's Honours List yet again.
>
>Don't thy realise that I have just survived nine days at the X^4's?
>
>If that dozen deserve a gong, what does?
>

You've no chance when B(illy)liar gets the KG. Fve Nagubal indeed.

Nagubal - I like that
--
0sterc@tcher -

"Oů sont les neiges d'antan?"

[Dennis Davis]

In article <I729mpAt...@salmiron.com>,

Nicholas D. Richards <nich...@salmiron.com> wrote:
>In article <sqt5h7$ist$1...@dont-email.me>, Tone <em...@address.com> on
>Sun, 2 Jan 2022 at 21:30:15 awoke Nicholas from his slumbers and wrote
>>I note that I have been missed off the New Year's Honours List yet again.
>>
>>Don't thy realise that I have just survived nine days at the X^4's?
>>
>>If that dozen deserve a gong, what does?
>>
>You've no chance when B(illy)liar gets the KG. Fve Nagubal indeed.
>
>Nagubal - I like that

That's within the personal gift of the Queen. Has little to do with
the main honours system.

If I were cynical, I'd suggest that it was done to divert some
attention from the Duke of Pork who is now back in the spotlight
after a recent court decision in Leftpondia. But I'm not cynical,
oh no, I'm not cynical...
--
Dennis Davis <denni...@fastmail.fm>

[Brian Gaff (Sofa)]

Yes I have discovered that the only way you can get a gong is to know people
who can recommend you to the right people.
So the only award I got for last year was avoid Award, which I guess was
well meant but in the future is probably not worth adding to my letter head,
assuming I had one.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Tone" <em...@address.com> wrote in message
news:sqt5h7$ist$1...@dont-email.me...

[Brian Gaff (Sofa)]

Some e might suggest that the older ones have a mental age of 12 as well.

Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!

"Nick Odell" <ni...@themusicworkshop.plus.com> wrote in message
news:q6a4tgpfgb81f1jij...@4ax.com...

[Brian Gaff (Sofa)]

Yes da Prince seems to be very naive or living in some kind of time bubble
of his own.
I wonder if he really remembers what he did back then in any case, and goes
for many of the also ran abusers who follow the leader cos it must be Ok to
be one of the lads.

Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!

"Dennis Davis" <denni...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:squcsd$105o$1...@gioia.aioe.org...

[Brian Gaff (Sofa)]

that was COVId, which I must add to the spellchecker. New years resolution.

Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!

"Brian Gaff (Sofa)" <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:squok3$l2s$1...@dont-email.me...

[Richard Robinson]

Me also not being cynical, I can't understand why no Marcus Rashford.

--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

[Nicholas D. Richards]

In article <squcsd$105o$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Dennis Davis
<denni...@fastmail.fm> on Mon, 3 Jan 2022 at 08:41:49 awoke Nicholas

from his slumbers and wrote
>In article <I729mpAt...@salmiron.com>,
>Nicholas D. Richards <nich...@salmiron.com> wrote:
>>In article <sqt5h7$ist$1...@dont-email.me>, Tone <em...@address.com> on
>>Sun, 2 Jan 2022 at 21:30:15 awoke Nicholas from his slumbers and wrote
>>>I note that I have been missed off the New Year's Honours List yet again.
>>>
>>>Don't thy realise that I have just survived nine days at the X^4's?
>>>
>>>If that dozen deserve a gong, what does?
>>>
>>You've no chance when B(illy)liar gets the KG. Fve Nagubal indeed.
>>
>>Nagubal - I like that
>
>That's within the personal gift of the Queen.

So they keep emphasising.

>Has little to do with
>the main honours system.

Ad nauseam

>
>If I were cynical, I'd suggest that it was done to divert some
>attention from the Duke of Pork who is now back in the spotlight
>after a recent court decision in Leftpondia. But I'm not cynical,
>oh no, I'm not cynical...

But I am and, I suspect that, the people who emphasise the personal gift
are just as cynical.

[Nick Odell]

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 07:23:01 -0600, Richard Robinson
<rich...@privacy.net> wrote:

>Dennis Davis said:
>> In article <I729mpAt...@salmiron.com>,
>> Nicholas D. Richards <nich...@salmiron.com> wrote:
>>>In article <sqt5h7$ist$1...@dont-email.me>, Tone <em...@address.com> on
>>>Sun, 2 Jan 2022 at 21:30:15 awoke Nicholas from his slumbers and wrote
>>>>I note that I have been missed off the New Year's Honours List yet again.
>>>>
>>>>Don't thy realise that I have just survived nine days at the X^4's?
>>>>
>>>>If that dozen deserve a gong, what does?
>>>>
>>>You've no chance when B(illy)liar gets the KG. Fve Nagubal indeed.
>>>
>>>Nagubal - I like that
>>
>> That's within the personal gift of the Queen. Has little to do with
>> the main honours system.
>>
>> If I were cynical, I'd suggest that it was done to divert some
>> attention from the Duke of Pork who is now back in the spotlight
>> after a recent court decision in Leftpondia. But I'm not cynical,
>> oh no, I'm not cynical...
>
>Me also not being cynical, I can't understand why no Marcus Rashford.

Erme - because he received his MBE the year before?

Nick

[Sam Plusnet]

Long time back, in the 1960s, I dun them Littlewoods' pools one time, &
ticked the box for "no publicity".

It seems to have jbexed very well, & nothing I have ever done has been
publicly recognised (thank <deity>).

Did you do the pools back then Tone?


--
Sam Plusnet

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Mon, 3 Jan 2022 12:07:21 -0000
"Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> Yes da Prince seems to be very naive or living in some kind of time
> bubble of his own.

I dunno about that, from what's just been published it looks like
she's been paid off once (very well - if someone had taken me to a sex
party when I was 17 and then paid me $500K not to sue I think I'd have
been well pleased - at least until my girlfriend found out) and he's
covered by it if he needs to be - judge to decide of course.

> I wonder if he really remembers what he did back then in any case, and
> goes for many of the also ran abusers who follow the leader cos it must
> be Ok to be one of the lads.

One thought is that if she'd been just a few months older or if
it had been in the UK, where she'd have been more than a year past the age
of consent, then it would have been legally OK.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

[Tone]

I'm breaking even on the pools and the lotteries.

Never bought a ticket.

Tone

[Brian Gaff (Sofa)]

Yes my Mother and grandmother used to do those, never did understand how
they worked but the guy would come around and collect them each week, and
have a natter and set the world to rights.
Does anyone know of anyone who did the one Horace Batchelor used to pedal
on Luxembourg, from his gated house in Keynsham Bristol?

Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!

"Sam Plusnet" <n...@home.com> wrote in message
news:DUIAJ.1404587$LNrd....@fx09.ams1...

[Peter]

"Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:sr101n$ep6$1...@dont-email.me:

> Does anyone know of anyone who did the one Horace Batchelor used to
> pedal
> on Luxembourg, from his gated house in Keynsham Bristol?
> Brian
>

The Famous Infra-draw method, IIRC. A rather ingeneous way of ensuring
that Horace got a slice of your winnings if you won on the pools, without
Horrace having to risk any of hiw own zbarl. I don't know anyone who used
his system but many must have - it certanly made him rich. I used to
enjoy groaning at the adverts on 207.

--
Peter
-----

[Mike Fleming]

On 03/01/2022 20:31, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jan 2022 12:07:21 -0000
> "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Yes da Prince seems to be very naive or living in some kind of time
>> bubble of his own.
>
> I dunno about that, from what's just been published it looks like
> she's been paid off once (very well - if someone had taken me to a sex
> party when I was 17 and then paid me $500K not to sue I think I'd have
> been well pleased - at least until my girlfriend found out) and he's
> covered by it if he needs to be - judge to decide of course.

The argument is that the agreement is vague to the point of
meaninglessness. Plus, in order for Andrew to be covered by the
agreement, his lawyers have to say that he's a person liable to be
prosecuted.

>> I wonder if he really remembers what he did back then in any case, and
>> goes for many of the also ran abusers who follow the leader cos it must
>> be Ok to be one of the lads.
>
> One thought is that if she'd been just a few months older or if
> it had been in the UK, where she'd have been more than a year past the age
> of consent, then it would have been legally OK.

Just being over the age of consent doesn't make it automatically OK -
there has to be consent, and it's not given if it's gained by coercion AIUI.

I await with interest the medical evidence that he's unable to sweat.
Coincidentally, lizards don't sweat.

[Tone]

One of the early ones to realise the potential of exploiting folks'
gullibility and greed, as does current TV betting advertising.

Tone

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 10:56:21 +0000
Mike Fleming <mi...@tauzero.co.uk> wrote:

> On 03/01/2022 20:31, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Jan 2022 12:07:21 -0000
> > "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes da Prince seems to be very naive or living in some kind of time
> >> bubble of his own.
> >
> > I dunno about that, from what's just been published it looks
> > like she's been paid off once (very well - if someone had taken me to a
> > sex party when I was 17 and then paid me $500K not to sue I think I'd
> > have been well pleased - at least until my girlfriend found out) and
> > he's covered by it if he needs to be - judge to decide of course.
>
> The argument is that the agreement is vague to the point of
> meaninglessness. Plus, in order for Andrew to be covered by the
> agreement, his lawyers have to say that he's a person liable to be
> prosecuted.

I thought the argument was more that if he acted as alleged then
he's covered by the agreement and if he didn't then there's no case and so
either way she can't sue him and so the question of whether he did or not
can't be raised in court.

> Just being over the age of consent doesn't make it automatically OK -
> there has to be consent, and it's not given if it's gained by coercion
> AIUI.

Fair point, although I had the impression that the Epstein approach
was more bedazzlement than coercion.

[Tone]

On 04/01/2022 11:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 10:56:21 +0000
> Mike Fleming <mi...@tauzero.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 03/01/2022 20:31, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Mon, 3 Jan 2022 12:07:21 -0000
>>> "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes da Prince seems to be very naive or living in some kind of time
>>>> bubble of his own.
>>>
>>> I dunno about that, from what's just been published it looks
>>> like she's been paid off once (very well - if someone had taken me to a
>>> sex party when I was 17 and then paid me $500K not to sue I think I'd
>>> have been well pleased - at least until my girlfriend found out) and
>>> he's covered by it if he needs to be - judge to decide of course.
>>
>> The argument is that the agreement is vague to the point of
>> meaninglessness. Plus, in order for Andrew to be covered by the
>> agreement, his lawyers have to say that he's a person liable to be
>> prosecuted.
>
> I thought the argument was more that if he acted as alleged then
> he's covered by the agreement and if he didn't then there's no case and so
> either way she can't sue him and so the question of whether he did or not
> can't be raised in court.
>

Isn't withholding evidence for any reason an offence in itself?

Tone

[Richard Robinson]

*Ah*. Good point, well made ...

[slumps off making vague arjlrneferfbyhgvba noises about keeping up at
the back]

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

I don't think that bites until the case starts - the question being
raised is whether she's allowed to bring it in the first place seeing as
she's been paid once and agreed that covered everybody involved. If it was
me being accused I'd expect that to save me the need to prove that I wasn't
involved. For all we know he's dodging court to avoid having to tell
everyone he was busy bonking Camilla at the time - which would upset
Charles a bit - OK if I had to bet it would be on him enjoying the party
favours on offer without a thought for the person inside the body and not
wanting to admit it publicly.

[Peter]

Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote in
news:EtqdnRTxScRO30n8...@brightview.co.uk:

>Making arjlrneferfbyhgvba noises at the back

I wish I could make arjlrneferfbyhgvba noises at the back, or even at the
front. Perfect way to greet some of my rellies.

--
Peter
-----

[Nicholas D. Richards]

In article <sr0vq2$cqo$1...@dont-email.me>, Tone <em...@address.com> on
Tue, 4 Jan 2022 at 08:17:08 awoke Nicholas from his slumbers and wrote

SWMBO keeps asking why she cannot even have one win. I point out to her
that she, like you, is also breaking even and that I, who is not
breaking even, have a teensy bit more chance of a win.

[Nicholas D. Richards]

In article <sz700yAf...@salmiron.com>, Nicholas D. Richards
<nich...@salmiron.com> on Tue, 4 Jan 2022 at 21:17:19 awoke Nicholas

from his slumbers and wrote
>In article <sr0vq2$cqo$1...@dont-email.me>, Tone <em...@address.com> on
>Tue, 4 Jan 2022 at 08:17:08 awoke Nicholas from his slumbers and wrote
>>On 03/01/2022 20:20, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>>> On 02-Jan-22 21:30, Tone wrote:
>>>> I note that I have been missed off the New Year's Honours List yet again.
>>>>
>>>> Don't thy realise that I have just survived nine days at the X^4's?
>>>>
>>>> If that dozen deserve a gong, what does?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Long time back, in the 1960s, I dun them Littlewoods' pools one time, &
>>> ticked the box for "no publicity".
>>>
>>> It seems to have jbexed very well, & nothing I have ever done has been
>>> publicly recognised (thank <deity>).
>>>
>>> Did you do the pools back then Tone?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I'm breaking even on the pools and the lotteries.
>>
>>Never bought a ticket.
>>
>>Tone
>SWMBO keeps asking why she cannot even have one win. I point out to her
>that she, like you, is also breaking even and that I, who is not
>breaking even, have a teensy bit more chance of a win.

Update at 21:35 My teensy bit chance of a win in my lifetime just became
a teensy bit less.

[Richard Robinson]

But it doesn't apply to him at all, unless he could be accused otherwise ?

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Wed, 05 Jan 2022 07:15:30 -0600
Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:

> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
> > On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 12:15:11 +0000

> > I don't think that bites until the case starts - the question
> > being raised is whether she's allowed to bring it in the first place
> > seeing as she's been paid once and agreed that covered everybody
> > involved.
>
> But it doesn't apply to him at all, unless he could be accused otherwise ?

Right - so either he didn't and there's no case to answer or he did
and he's covered by the agreement either way she can't sue him - at least
that seems to be his lawyer's point. I get the idea that somebody doesn't
want the question of what he did or did not do with her asked in court.

[Bernard Peek]

There's yet another twist to the tale. The agreement doesn't automatically
cover him. Thw wording says that it only covers people specified by either
Epstein or Giuffre. Epstein is dead and she isn't going to let him off the
hook.



--
Bernard Peek
b...@shrdlu.com

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On 5 Jan 2022 16:12:07 GMT

Bernard Peek <b...@shrdlu.com> wrote:

> There's yet another twist to the tale. The agreement doesn't automatically
> cover him. Thw wording says that it only covers people specified by either
> Epstein or Giuffre. Epstein is dead and she isn't going to let him off the
> hook.

Oh what fun.

[Dennis Davis]

In article <EtqdnRTxScRO30n8...@brightview.co.uk>,
Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:
>Nick Odell said:

...

>> Erme - because he received his MBE the year before?
>
>*Ah*. Good point, well made ...
>
>[slumps off making vague arjlrneferfbyhgvba noises about keeping up
>at the back]

I've got one of those:

1. Don't make New Year's Resolutions.
--
Dennis Davis <denni...@fastmail.fm>

[Nicholas D. Richards]

In article <sr66rv$1m4c$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Dennis Davis
<denni...@fastmail.fm> on Thu, 6 Jan 2022 at 07:48:16 awoke Nicholas

from his slumbers and wrote

I kept that last year, so I didn't.

[Richard Robinson]

Never mind, I expect you'll forget where you put it before long.

[Richard Robinson]

Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:

> On 5 Jan 2022 16:12:07 GMT
> Bernard Peek <b...@shrdlu.com> wrote:
>
>> There's yet another twist to the tale. The agreement doesn't automatically
>> cover him. Thw wording says that it only covers people specified by either
>> Epstein or Giuffre.

I think I also heard "in the US". London was also mentioned.

Not that I expect anything to come of that, of course.

>> Epstein is dead and she isn't going to let him off the
>> hook.
>
> Oh what fun.
>


--

[Mike Fleming]

I thought it was because the only people who could request the
enforcement of the contract were the signatories - Epstein and Giuffre.