He's back...
- Thread starter brb
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
H
Hoddle is a god
Guest
Let’s not revisit s106gate as amusing as it is to review now. There were some hilarious claims in that one!
Stanley, Stanley, Stanley!
I have resolved on several things, one of which is to not even begin to attempt to engage in any banter with you as we clearly are on different ends of the banter spectrum. I am not going to accuse you of lacking humour (because I have seen that you like to laugh at the misfortune of others, so you do possess a certain, albeit cruel, sense of fun), I am simply going to acknowledge that what is banter to me is alien to you, and vice versa. Whether you, in turn, are prepared to accept and acknowledge that, I don't care. That is just how it is, as far as I am concerned.
Let me assure you, however, that not only do I know exactly what a section 106 Agreement is, but that I have drafted the mother of all such agreements, for a National developer, and in respect of a project that was National headlines at the time. Client confidentiality prevents me from divulging any more information than that.
That I entered into banter with you and others on this forum over - not only 106-gate - but other legal matters, clearly escaped you. As I say, I am no longer prepared to engage you in trying to convince you otherwise.
It's actually quite funny watching you eat yourself up over this.
Early rant^^^
Stanley, Stanley, Stanley!
I have resolved on several things, one of which is to not even begin to attempt to engage in any banter with you as we clearly are on different ends of the banter spectrum. I am not going to accuse you of lacking humour (because I have seen that you like to laugh at the misfortune of others, so you do possess a certain, albeit cruel, sense of fun), I am simply going to acknowledge that what is banter to me is alien to you, and vice versa. Whether you, in turn, are prepared to accept and acknowledge that, I don't care. That is just how it is, as far as I am concerned.
Let me assure you, however, that not only do I know exactly what a section 106 Agreement is, but that I have drafted the mother of all such agreements, for a National developer, and in respect of a project that was National headlines at the time. Client confidentiality prevents me from divulging any more information than that.
That I entered into banter with you and others on this forum over - not only 106-gate - but other legal matters, clearly escaped you. As I say, I am no longer prepared to engage you in trying to convince you otherwise.
It's actually quite funny watching you eat yourself up over this.
Stanley, Stanley, Stanley!
I have resolved on several things, one of which is to not even begin to attempt to engage in any banter with you as we clearly are on different ends of the banter spectrum. I am not going to accuse you of lacking humour (because I have seen that you like to laugh at the misfortune of others, so you do possess a certain, albeit cruel, sense of fun), I am simply going to acknowledge that what is banter to me is alien to you, and vice versa. Whether you, in turn, are prepared to accept and acknowledge that, I don't care. That is just how it is, as far as I am concerned.
Let me assure you, however, that not only do I know exactly what a section 106 Agreement is, but that I have drafted the mother of all such agreements, for a National developer, and in respect of a project that was National headlines at the time. Client confidentiality prevents me from divulging any more information than that.
That I entered into banter with you and others on this forum over - not only 106-gate - but other legal matters, clearly escaped you. As I say, I am no longer prepared to engage you in trying to convince you otherwise.
It's actually quite funny watching you eat yourself up over this.
Think i'll stick the kettle on.
Keep your hat on.
Stanley, Stanley, Stanley!
I have resolved on several things, one of which is to not even begin to attempt to engage in any banter with you as we clearly are on different ends of the banter spectrum. I am not going to accuse you of lacking humour (because I have seen that you like to laugh at the misfortune of others, so you do possess a certain, albeit cruel, sense of fun), I am simply going to acknowledge that what is banter to me is alien to you, and vice versa. Whether you, in turn, are prepared to accept and acknowledge that, I don't care. That is just how it is, as far as I am concerned.
Let me assure you, however, that not only do I know exactly what a section 106 Agreement is, but that I have drafted the mother of all such agreements, for a National developer, and in respect of a project that was National headlines at the time. Client confidentiality prevents me from divulging any more information than that.
That I entered into banter with you and others on this forum over - not only 106-gate - but other legal matters, clearly escaped you. As I say, I am no longer prepared to engage you in trying to convince you otherwise.
It's actually quite funny watching you eat yourself up over this.
Hilary’s secretary can make the tea. If she can find her way through the suite of offices/the spare bedroom.
H
Hoddle is a god
Guest
Okay, Pix. Let's play a game.
You now know all about me, yeah?
Answer these questions...
Where did I go to University?
What is the name of the college that I attended?
What degree(s) did I achieve?
What other professional qualification do I hold?
What is my line of specialisation?
Did I run the San Francisco Marathon?
Did I recently go to Las Vegas?
Which very famous musician is a friend of mine?
Is it true that I have two sons?
Is it true that I am married?
Is it true that my wife wrote off her car driving us under a lorry?
If, as you say, you gained access to my Facebook account (before I blocked it), you will know the answers to each of these questions.
Remember, you are one of a very small handful of people who cast aspersions on each of the details listed above, and made some very cruel and unpleasant comments.
Before I devise a "whole new World of bullshit" for myself, let us be clear on what you know to be true about me, yeah?
Yeah but ya can't eat just one.
True...normally if i'm reading 606 i end up scoffing the whole packet.
But what's real Stan?
Is HiaG the biscuit with Skylarker the orange bit in the middle and Spurcock the chocolate coating?