Sorry, I should’ve used the term ‘avoidance’ not ‘evasion’, only Polanski will know if it was actually the latter.
Sorry, I should’ve used the term ‘avoidance’ not ‘evasion’, only Polanski will know if it was actually the latter.
It's what a nation (driven by 24 hour news media) addicted to political chaos looks like. We are in the era of the PM as football manager - "He's no use. We haven't had growth in two months and our national defence looks leaky. Get a new one in!"This is an absolute brick show.
An ordinary punter wouldn't be able to tell the tax authorities they didn't get it right because they didn't know the rules, so it should be no different for Mr Polanski (as he's calling himself these days).
...You should cut down on your Boatlife, mate;
Pay some taxes!
I know it's "fringe party" stuff but the hypnosis boobs and changing your name to one that is linked to a possible child rapist is just weird.
There you go, you learn something everyday.His family name is Polanski, they changed it the other way to avoid antisemitism post war, then changed it back
Er....but that's what anyone would say if they didn't literally know the rules up until the moment they were told the rules.An ordinary punter wouldn't be able to tell the tax authorities they didn't get it right because they didn't know the rules, so it should be no different for Mr Polanski (as he's calling himself these days).
The green councils are going to have a hard time collecting taxes from their residents. Any number of excuses
Whooaaa there. I know you're new here. YouThere you go, you learn something everyday.
Thanks for the correction.
To be fair she didn't call him a child rapist.The far right queen has effed it again
I was going to but I'm too lazy, must be generation thing.Whooaaa there. I know you're new here. You
Can't just do that - you must show outrage at being corrected, double down on your position and then argue the point for four pages until neither of you remember what you're arguing about.
Pfft.
Games gone. Ed Davey out
To be fair she didn't call him a child rapist.
She called him an enabler of child rapists.
They does seem too far - but it's clearly an issue; see Jess Phillips resignation letter
To be fair she didn't call him a child rapist.
She called him an enabler of child rapists.
They does seem too far - but it's clearly an issue; see Jess Phillips resignation letter
To be fair, with her grammar, it can be read as he is both a child rapist and also a paedophile enabler, rather than a child rapist enabler and a paedophile enabler.
First time I skimmed through it I didn't immediately link the enabler bit to both parts of the statement.
Surprisingly, her grammar is correct.To be fair, with her grammar, it can be read as he is both a child rapist and also a paedophile enabler, rather than a child rapist enabler and a paedophile enabler.
First time I skimmed through it I didn't immediately link the enabler bit to both parts of the statement.
Surprisingly, her grammar is correct.
"He's a child rapist and paedophile enabler" is as I've described it.
"He's a child rapist, and paedophile enabler" would be stating the two separate things.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.