cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Your Views Messageboard
Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"
Name:
Subject:
Boardcode:
B I U S Sub Sup Size Color Spoiler Hide ul ol li left center right Quote Code Img URL  
Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons
B) :( :) :laugh:
:cheer: ;) :P :angry:
:unsure: :ohmy: :huh: :dry:
:lol: :silly: :blink: :blush:
:kiss: :woohoo: :side: :S
More Smilies
 Enter code here   

Topic History of: The de Gaulle ceremony today
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author Message
In The Know Martha wrote:
Yes, appalling that they could not get any type of substantive reply to the questioning.

Martha

I didn't actually watch the hearing, so apart from the snippets that I saw on the news, am largely unaware of what went on .... but, isn't it true that he said there was an ONGOING investigation - and it would be unfair to comment until it had reported back ?

Isn't it also true that Congress only called this hearing - knowing that the investigation was ongoing - in order to "convince" their electors that they were doing something ?
veritas Martha wrote:
Prunella Minge wrote:
that episode was appalling.

Yes, appalling that they could not get any type of substantive reply to the questioning.

BTW Pru, you also failed to answer my question about Cameron - what DID he do?



Isn't a bit early to judge him ?. Should the fact he's a off really matter ?
I reckon about a year in the job is how long it will take to se what he's like.

The BP episode in Congress was a shambles and even worse are the current Republicans who actually demanded Congressmen should apologise !
Martha Prunella Minge wrote:
we'll have to agree to disagree about how a serious congressional investigation should conduct itself regardless of whether the subject is forthcoming or not forthcoming

Yes Pru - 'agree to disagree'

But I think we CAN agree that Hayward will be a lot more forthcoming in the inevitable legal cases/court proceedings which will plague BP - and its share price - for years.

If Hayward had held his hands up and said 'we messed up, made an error of judgement and I take full responsibility' - history would have been kinder to him and BP which may not now survive.

Prunella Minge Well unless you REALLY think he was literally comatose for his first few decades I assume you know. I've never voted Tory in my life so I'm hardly going to strain myself to compile a positive-sounding resume for him, am I? I guess Friday is a quiet day and you fancy a rather pointless debate but I've now got something to get finished before 6pm so I'm afraid it'll be one-sided! And we'll have to agree to disagree about how a serious congressional investigation should conduct itself regardless of whether the subject is forthcoming or not forthcoming. The likes of Waxman behaved disgracefully IMHO.
Martha Prunella Minge wrote:
that episode was appalling.

Yes, appalling that they could not get any type of substantive reply to the questioning.

BTW Pru, you also failed to answer my question about Cameron - what DID he do?