FabSwingers.com forum: Hookers and Lord Sewell

By *ifferent69 OP Man
over a year ago

BRIGHTON, UK

I think the concern for the establishment is that one of them has let his guard down which in turn mean awkward questions for others...

Always found uneasy the PR from gov,t ovet prostitution / immoral earnings potential unpaid taxes..... and sex traffickers....

Yet soho and walk ups flourish and no doubt other premisses not a stones throw away from Westminster....

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By *ngel n tedCouple
over a year ago

maidstone

What else they gonna do, you don't think they spend the whole day sat in their respective house in westminster, murmuring and occasionally clapping and saying "nyes nyes nyes" do you?

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

"I think the concern for the establishment is that one of them has let his guard down which in turn mean awkward questions for others...

Always found uneasy the PR from gov,t ovet prostitution / immoral earnings potential unpaid taxes..... and sex traffickers....

Yet soho and walk ups flourish and no doubt other premisses not a stones throw away from Westminster....

Soho's not as bad as it used to be tbh - the problems are elsewhere

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By *andom2chatMan
over a year ago

A Galaxy Far, Far Away & Spain

It's yet another nail in the coffin for this outdated branch of government. Clearly, it's one rule for those dishing out policy & moralising to the electorate, but another for those in positions of power. High time we have a complete overhaul of our electoral system so they answer to those who pay for their lifestyle.

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By *erbyDalesCplCouple
over a year ago

Derbyshire

When I read the other thread, I hadn't realised hookers.were involved. May I change my opinion?

The government are so used to screwing the whole country, it's refreshing to know that at least someone is charging them for when they do it to them.

Mr dcc

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ah but should we be condemning someone who indulges his sexual appetite?

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

He's been a fool , his family must be devastated and confused , he's resigned his post without protest,,, and he will face police prosecution for breaking any laws,,,

You're welcome...

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By *andom2chatMan
over a year ago

A Galaxy Far, Far Away & Spain

I don't think anyone is condemning him for what he does out with his marriage but I certainly do for some of the positions of authority he's been in charge of whilst pontificating from his ivory tower, especially when he's paid over £84K of public money for his role as head of the Lords' Privileges and Conduct Committee & quoted as saying "the actions of a few damage our reputation" and being the architect of procedures where, "All members sign a declaration to obey the code and the seven principles of public life. The requirement that members must always act on their personal honour has been reinforced". Perhaps he thought the code he designed excluded him, or he didn't "always act on personal honour", or perhaps he simply didn't take his role & the rules that seriously. After all it's only public money & there's more of where that came from - even in times of "austerity".

Frankly I don't care what any of the political elite do in bed, whether they snort , crack or other substances. I do take issue when they tell the public they'll tackle the corruption & disregard for the rules, then blatantly disregard the very rules we pay them to be in control of.

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I don't think anyone is condemning him for what he does out with his marriage but I certainly do for some of the positions of authority he's been in charge of whilst pontificating from his ivory tower, especially when he's paid over £84K of public money for his role as head of the Lords' Privileges and Conduct Committee & quoted as saying "the actions of a few damage our reputation" and being the architect of procedures where, "All members sign a declaration to obey the code and the seven principles of public life. The requirement that members must always act on their personal honour has been reinforced". Perhaps he thought the code he designed excluded him, or he didn't "always act on personal honour", or perhaps he simply didn't take his role & the rules that seriously. After all it's only public money & there's more of where that came from - even in times of "austerity".

The "rules" prohibit extra marital sex and a snort?

Come on, it is not that black and white.

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By *r and mrs sanddancerCouple
over a year ago

BOLDON COLLIERY

looks like he was a bit on the mean side paying £200 a night hookers

is that the best he could afford, local rate in any area is £100-200 an hour

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By *razedcatMan
over a year ago

London / Herts

"looks like he was a bit on the mean side paying £200 a night hookers

is that the best he could afford, local rate in any area is £100-200 an hour

If he was supplying the blow, I imagine they gave him a discount, lol.

It is disgraceful though. A lawmaker flouting the law.

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

http://www.fabswingers.com/forum/lounge/410249

(thread closed by moderator)

Reply privately