I'm not prone to shagging my colleagues wives, taking bungs for guided tours of my workplace, racist comments at work and generally being a bull headed greedy prick.Not as much as you though eh Tobes?
I'm not prone to shagging my colleagues wives, taking bungs for guided tours of my workplace, racist comments at work and generally being a bull headed greedy prick.Not as much as you though eh Tobes?
Well I reckon you've probably done worse in your time though, eh?I'm not prone to shagging my colleagues wives, taking bungs for guided tours of my workplace, racist comments at work and generally being a bull headed greedy prick.
Your first response said king was "hurling racist insults around" go back and read it.
If you had said that he'd been arrested for racially aggrevated abh I would not of said anything as that is a fact.
But after I challenged you, you simply continued with saying he had been racist ... you even said that "if it was not racially aggravated abh why was he arrested for it?"
Can you seriously not see the stupidity of that?
As for RVP I thought I was being very clear.
I mentioned him because I seem to remember an argument on the gooner board when he joined United . Someone called him a rapist and this very argument broke out about him being accused not being the same as him being guilty.
If I was seeking to wum or throw **** around I would have spoken about an arsenal legend who was proved guilty of a criminal act...All clubs have them for ffs
As for the tory stuff...pretty sure I have read your views on the tory press on other threads so find it odd you quote them as proof of King being guilty of racism.
the argument that being arrested for a crime or being accused of one in the press makes you guilty is a classic tory line of argument except when it effects a tory of course..
you have made a statement and when challenged talked rubbish...calling me a hypocrite might make you feel better but it's bollocks.
Enjoy being right in your head but I am genuinely surprised you think that some one being arrested is the same as someone being guilty or that it is OK to accuse some one of racism with no actual proof
I will leave this alone now as I don't wish to bore everyone
IThe initial point was that the spuds were making unfounded accusations about Wilshere drunkenly starting a fight and running away from it when there is absolutely **** all evidence of that happening.
I pointed out that Ledley King was arrested for 'racially aggravated assault' and yes I should have said 'alleged' when I said he was hurling racist insults. But I think it's pretty clear that the police suspected that also because they arrested him for racially aggravated assault. At no point did I call him a racist or continue to call him a racist as you have claimed. I said that he was arrested for racially aggravated assault, which he was.
Your comments about the Tories are just stupid. The story was covered in the guardian and the independent, both left leaning papers, so it's a dumb point that you're trying to make.
And you've ****ed up the quote reply so now the whole thing is too arduous to read.![]()

I'm not prone to shagging my colleagues wives, taking bungs for guided tours of my workplace, racist comments at work and generally being a bull headed greedy prick.
Never understood why the term Paki is racist, its just short for Pakistani right?
Same as calling a British person a Brit, or a Scottish person a Scot.
You won't understand unless you are one.
But when someone calls you a bold **** because they hate you or bold **** because he's your mate...the person being called it can tell. Plus the whole world could be bold...so being a bold **** is not being offensive to your whole heritage. Even if Paki is not an offensive word, it is certainly meant by some with offensive intent and is therefore taken as such, because in reality it is masking a hatred for someone, his family, his heritage. There is a big difference.
I have a lot of friends from Pakistani origin. I call them Pakis, they just laugh, take it in their stride etc etc.
Yids comes from Yiddish. So really it should not be seen as offensive. However over time it has been morphed into a racist slur against Jews. Therefore has also become an offensive term...because it is used by people to cause offence to other cultures which once again masks a hatred and once again if its your mate saying it you would not mind.
If over time Brit evolves into an offensive racist slur, it would go the same route.
You won't understand unless you are one.
But when someone calls you a bold **** because they hate you or bold **** because he's your mate...the person being called it can tell. Plus the whole world could be bold...so being a bold **** is not being offensive to your whole heritage. Even if Paki is not an offensive word, it is certainly meant by some with offensive intent and is therefore taken as such, because in reality it is masking a hatred for someone, his family, his heritage. There is a big difference.
I have a lot of friends from Pakistani origin. I call them Pakis, they just laugh, take it in their stride etc etc.
Yids comes from Yiddish. So really it should not be seen as offensive. However over time it has been morphed into a racist slur against Jews. Therefore has also become an offensive term...because it is used by people to cause offence to other cultures which once again masks a hatred and once again if its your mate saying it you would not mind.
If over time Brit evolves into an offensive racist slur, it would go the same route.
I wouldn't normally do this .... but I suspect you mean 'bald'... unless, of course, you were joshing your mate for being courageous, dynamic and energetic perhaps ... if so, I apologise for the intrusion ...
Cheers mate...I just hadn't seen you for a while, so threw some bait.
.... that would be 'groundbait' (just in case that renowned coarse (appropriate) fisherman HIAG is loitering) ...... can you pair of planks sort out your reply parameters![]()
Messed up while on my phone...**** happens...sorry folks

First one was trueFirst one is not true.
Second is true
Third is not true
fourth is true.
And yes, he is a ****.
First one isnt true AT ALL.First one was true
The second one was true
The third one was true - just not proven in a court of law
The fourth one was true
And yes indeed, he's a prize ****
Just stating facts.Why would anyone defend John Terry?!
Cue the Giggs comments!
![]()
Is the dumbest sentence you will type today,[, Pixie]?

First one isnt true AT ALL.
1) She wasnt Bridges wife
2) When she lied and said she had slept with John Terry, she and Bridge had been split up a year
3) She admitted in the national press that she never slept with JT and issued an unreserved apology
Second one 100% true
Third: What was said was this (verified by lip readers)
Anton: Did you just call me a black ****?
John: NO! Course I never called you a black ****, you ****ing knob head
Fourth is true
Try again
Anyway, this all comes back to the fact that despite some fanciful stories, Wilshere hasn't done anything wrong
RCL ****ed up his reply and when I quoted it, it doubly ****ed it. I was on my phone and couldn't be arsed to go back and correct his mistake![]()