Max Mosley opens a can of worms.

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

9th July 2008, 13:18
ioan

Quote:

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Clearly, the Max Mrs Mosely sees before her now aint the guy she married!

Does ANYONE think it right to hide dirty secrets from your wife/partner? And his Kids! If he feels hard done by because this came out, there is a real simple rule of thumb...

Dont fecking do it in the first place! Numpty!

Yes I think it's right to hide dirty secrets from your partner, and especially from the kids.
Can you challenge my opinion in any way?! I doubt it.
9th July 2008, 13:20
ioan

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

I have never argued that Max does not have the right to defend himself in court.

Than what did you mean with this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

he is relishing this court case rather than considering the wider implications.
9th July 2008, 13:26
SGWilko

Quote:

Originally Posted by ioan

Yes I think it's right to hide dirty secrets from your partner, and especially from the kids.
Can you challenge my opinion in any way?! I doubt it.

Shame on you Ioan!

It is very wrong, for the very reasons Max is experiencing now - humiliation shame and depravation.

Trust, is a wonderful thing. There can be none in that family now. How does his wife now feel. Inadequate? Used? Violated perhaps?

What a horrid little man Max has turned out to be.

I tell you, I'm not saying my dung don't hum, but there are no skeletons in my closet.

I was dragged up proper me. Was taught respect, manners and integrity.

I hope that man loses his case.

NB - As for your opinion, can I refer you to Voltaire?
9th July 2008, 13:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

I do recall someone saying Max relishes conflict. As a former barrister it seems he is relishing this court case rather than considering the wider implications.

Thank god you're not a lawyer.
9th July 2008, 14:43
Knock-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by ioan

Than what did you mean with this:

Arrows said that Max seems to be relishing the case rather than the implications.

How does this in any way trasnslate to Arrows even implying that Max doesn't have the right to defend himself.

:confused:
9th July 2008, 15:22
Bagwan

Quote:

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Clearly, the Max Mrs Mosely sees before her now aint the guy she married!

Does ANYONE think it right to hide dirty secrets from your wife/partner? And his Kids! If he feels hard done by because this came out, there is a real simple rule of thumb...

Dont fecking do it in the first place! Numpty!

What about the Aryan race then? Oh, no, didn't hear or remember that guvn'or. How frightfully convenient is that then?

WHo has all the integrity now then.

Plus the £35k for the hooker (they are not hookers! :laugh :) and the all expenses trips to Monaco.

All this appropriate behaviour of the FIA president is it?

Off with his knackers I say! :D

Good thing you're not a judge .

How the hell do you know what Mrs. Mosely thinks ?
How would you know if this was news to her at all ?
How would you know whether she condones this activity or not ?

You assume .

You know Max is still married , don't you ?
You also know Max hasn't denied anything but that there was no Nazi connotation , don't you ?

You understand that this was clearly a sting , don't you ?

I must note it is ironic for you to use the phrase " rule of thumb" , when speaking about this affair , as some note the origin of the saying as being the maximum thickness of the stick with which you are allowed to beat your wife . Whilst it may not be the true etomology of the phase , it is very well known .

Mrs. Mosely , for all you or I know , might be into the same things .
9th July 2008, 15:22
ArrowsFA1

Quote:

Originally Posted by ioan

Than what did you mean with this:

ioan, what you've quoted has nothing to do with me denying Max the right to defend himself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamburello

Thank god you're not a lawyer.

Oh I dunno...might be a bit of a larf :laugh: :laugh:
9th July 2008, 15:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knock-on

Arrows said that Max seems to be relishing the case rather than the implications.

How does this in any way trasnslate to Arrows even implying that Max doesn't have the right to defend himself.

:confused:

Because, the way I read it, Arrows seems to think that the 'implications' are more important than the right to defend yourself.

If that were the case, it would be impossible for anybody in any position of authority to ever try to clear their name. That would lead to easy blackmail and false accusations aimed solely at destroying lives.

Welcome to Zimbabwe, Mr Arrows.
9th July 2008, 15:37
Bagwan

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

ioan, what you've quoted has nothing to do with me denying Max the right to defend himself.

Oh I dunno...might be a bit of a larf :laugh: :laugh:

It does seem to imply that he shouldn't defend himself , in light of those "wider implications" , or that the decision to do so is corrupt in some way because of it's motivation .
Surely the motivation behind this sting is more corrupt than the glee that one might feel at getting one back on dirty opponents such as these foul swine .
9th July 2008, 15:41
ArrowsFA1

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamburello

Because, the way I read it, Arrows seems to think that the 'implications' are more important than the right to defend yourself.

Which would be an entirely incorrect assumption.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page