• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2


Scandalous. Imagine losing your home or going to jail due to a computer system which couldn’t add up and just accused sub post masters of stealing non-existent money,
You would have thought common sense would kick in and that you wouldn't have a whole starta of workers at 1 level involved in mass fraud...
 
What on Earth is he saying?

There is an issue with cancel culture just not the one conservatives think there is. Dog-piling when someone says something slightly wrong or misinterpreted when no harm was intended or made, not people not wanting to deal with actively shitty people.
 
woke literally means "awake to the plight of others" AKA "possessing of compassion"

It's amazing how the right always likes to weaponise "being nice" as a bad thing to be fought against.
see also "political correctness" - so much better to be politically incorrect
"social justice warrior" - there's literally no better reason to go to war than for social justice
"offended on behalf of others" - or "has empathy"
"virtue signalling" - the very use of this phrase is a bigot signal

The "war of woke" is quite literally a desire to wage war against people for being nice.

For myself - I take all of the above as a compliment ( probably whilst being accused of being a snowflake by someone who'll call the mods if I use the bigot signal in reply ;) )
 
Last edited:
Be interesting to know the details, because I thought Giuffre wouldn't settle unless it came with some kind of apology or admission.

I think the settlement includes non-disclosure conditions although it does state that a 'substantial donation' will be made to her charity which was supposedly set up to support victims' rights. I would imagine another substantial donation will be made to her personal bank account. Money talks! Must be nice to have a world class legal team and a bottomless pit of cash to make problems go away.
 
I think the settlement includes non-disclosure conditions although it does state that a 'substantial donation' will be made to her charity which was supposedly set up to support victims' rights. I would imagine another substantial donation will be made to her personal bank account. Money talks! Must be nice to have a world class legal team and a bottomless pit of cash to make problems go away.

As he's a member of the Royal Family, could we suggest his payment will be made with tax payer's money?
 
I think the settlement includes non-disclosure conditions although it does state that a 'substantial donation' will be made to her charity which was supposedly set up to support victims' rights. I would imagine another substantial donation will be made to her personal bank account. Money talks! Must be nice to have a world class legal team and a bottomless pit of cash to make problems go away.
Oh I'm sure there is a huge NDA clause, but you've got to wonder if Giuffre backed down or Andrew did give a private apology as part of it.
 
Oh I'm sure there is a huge NDA clause, but you've got to wonder if Giuffre backed down or Andrew did give a private apology as part of it.

We may never know. If he did give an apology it would have been carefully written by his legal team and probably along the lines of him being sorry for what she's had to go through as opposed to him being sorry for what he did.
 
We may never know. If he did give an apology it would have been carefully written by his legal team and probably along the lines of him being sorry for what she's had to go through as opposed to him being sorry for what he did.
This may also be part of the reason he fought it as a "private citizen", I'd imagine if the crown was officially involved in any capacity, some law about freedom of information may have revealed what the settlement was. Not sure though as the laws and rules become very grey and fuzzy once you get to the royals.
 
This may also be part of the reason he fought it as a "private citizen", I'd imagine if the crown was officially involved in any capacity, some law about freedom of information may have revealed what the settlement was. Not sure though as the laws and rules become very grey and fuzzy once you get to the royals.
It also meant that royal assets weren't on the line I believe so no to the taxpayers money
 

Latest posts

Sponsored
UnlistMe
Back
Top