Doingalright Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 jonnie marbles, whoever you are - what a man!!! viva jonnie marbles!! oh give over, he's an arse, whatever we think of Rupert Murdoch, the custard pie attack, or in this case, shaving foam, has become a moronic cliche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Real tough guy attacking an 80+ year old. Not got the guts to go for he son. Publicity seeking scumbag. You make a very valid point. Had the unconscionable assailant gone for the younger and more physically able son then he would no doubt have parried the shaving foam "pie" with a baloon animal sausage dog and then thrust a merraguine pie into his respect-for media-tycoons-less face in a coup de grace that would have cheered the nation. The News of the World will no doubt run a ten page spread on what a scumbag he is for attacking a defenceless 80 year old...oopsie, no they gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xfox3x Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 It was as stupid and as pointless as throwing eggs, shoes, flour etc etc at people. Ridiculous behaviour that does nothing except prove that some people are too thick to argue their point in an civilised manner. Takes real guts to ambush an old man who is seated - NOT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InigoMontoya Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 jonnie marbles, whoever you are - what a man!!! along with the indignity of his fascistic empire crumbling before his eyes, murdoch was custard pied in the mother of parliaments - viva jonnie marbles!! Then you are an idiot. You've deflected the attention from the issue, and put it onto this grandstanding buffoon who's only dedication is to his own self-importance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Then you are an idiot. You've deflected the attention from the issue, and put it onto this grandstanding buffoon who's only dedication is to his own self-importance. OK, the man was after publicity, mbut don't write it off. It gives NI an opportunity to use it as a lever and thus prove they are pure effing evil or brush it off as something and nothing and have credibility in their continued very confused testimonies. Rupert murdoch is clearly a lying manipulative degenerate old sod so him getting a pie in the face is low on the list of things that concern me, if he was half the digger he claimed to be that would be water off a ducks back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitch_1980 Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Then you are an idiot. You've deflected the attention from the issue, and put it onto this grandstanding buffoon who's only dedication is to his own self-importance. He was just another bloke who did not like another bloke with money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riche Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 jonnie marbles, whoever you are - what a man!!! along with the indignity of his fascistic empire crumbling before his eyes, murdoch was custard pied in the mother of parliaments - viva jonnie marbles!! The truth will out. Pushin a pie in Murdoch's face gets us no closer to the truth. The pie man is a fool and worse. His contempt for Murdock is clear, but what was his motive silly man. Murdoch must be put on the stand and be judged by the evidence. All it did was give the papers a cheap front page and the pie man cult status amongst fools like you FRANK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 He was just another bloke who did not like another bloke with money. I think that fails to differenciate between a guy with money and a guy whose money comes from crime. Seems like a lot of Rupes profits come from crime.a I have no issue with a man or woman who makes a fortune, well done to them, provided they do it legally. Seems like Murdochs money comes from criminal enterprise, even if he cannot selectively remember it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 The attack was a battery. (Not an assault, because he didn't see it coming.) A minor attack really ... but with implications. Parliament has the right to demand that individuals appear (and account for themselves) before it. But Parliament can't protect those it summons from criminal attacks? 'I was summonsed by Parliament, but I didn't appear because I might be liable to be assaulted or to be battered and those arseholes (who supposedly run the country) couldn't be arsed to protect me.' NOTW stuff ... but there is no NOTW ... who's going to report attacks on people who appear before Parliamentary committees? Will the guy who battered Murdoch (as I said earlier, it wasn't an assault - but it was a battery) be charged? Will Parliament be required to tell the people (each and all of whom can be summonsed and each and all of whom must comply with the terms of that summons) how they are going to protect people? Murdoch scored more points with that pie than the whole of Newscorp could ever lose. Called to appear before Parliament. Appeared and was battered. Parliament couldn't (be bothered to) protect him. Remind me again: What crime had he been convicted of? Not a problem. Battering an 80-year old man is quite normal in the UK. It's perfectly acceptable if it is done in the Palace of Westminster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 I think that fails to differenciate between a guy with money and a guy whose money comes from crime. Seems like a lot of Rupes profits come from crime. ... And I thought we were at least neutral! Put your money where your mouth is! NONE of my money came from crime.:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.