skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(316)
-
▼
August
(39)
- Change of plan
- What are you trying to do to me
- Nice day in Panama
- Panama City
- New forfeit please
- Strong arguments
- Clarification
- I have failed
- The Forefeit
- Forefeit
- The weekend
- One month in Panama
- My challenge
- The winner of Charade
- En Espanol
- Another Charade
- My weekend
- The weekend
- Like a virgin
- Stewards Enquiry
- The Winner
- Rules of the Charade Game
- The Charade Game
- Besieged by rain
- Besieged by rain
- Besieged by rain
- The sun is out
- Saturday Night
- Rain stop play
- Traducir para Claudia
- No title
- Weekend
- No title
- The rain is back
- Before the comments i do not know how that happened.
- Not much to say
- Little pleasures
- No title
- No title
-
▼
August
(39)
12 comments:
Right...my verdict:
* I fully acknowledge the technical restrictions on timing, that has been consistent for the whole time you have been travelling
* Background music & attire....passed muster
* I didn't observe any tooth enamel on display thoroughout..passed
* HOWEVER, as Sarah pointed out, there were no single arm press-ups & I do believe that they WERE specified in the final confimation posting!!
I call upon the 'South America Adventure' panel re the omission of single arm push ups. Has the forfeit been executed to our complete satisfaction????
I say...it has not.
Panel...your votes please!
Mx
I made the techincal comments before my initial observations! How rude of me!
Don,
Thank you for accepting & executing the challenge, a very good display, fully appreciated the lycra shorts, always a treat. An entertaining piece of footage on a Saturday afternoon.
Mx
Yes you are right Mechelle. I think the 'South America Adventure' panel must not re the omission of single arm push ups, and I propose that our boy makes other video with this.
Mechelle I'm with you on this one!!
My verdict is no - failed on the single arm push ups!
xxx
Need the votes from Sal & Dee, but I believe the majority have been cast.....
The panel requires a rerun Mr Simon...
Mx
I see and understand however the weekend is not over, i have until Monday morning to complete your task. It will be completed.
Your man in Panama
You know i'm your boy and always got your back BUT on this case Mechelle does have a valid case. However, (step up Johnny Cochrane) i do believe she only made recommendations as to what type of press ups you should do and these were not actually definitive but merely suggestive. With that in mind i (at this point i turn to face the panel) would ask that these fair and upright ladies take this into consideration when casting their vote. I take my seat....
L8ter..... Mr Cochrane, your loyalty to Mr Simon is without doubt admirable! However, one would be unwise to so flagrantly disregard such clear recommendations! Which I quote Mr Simon "understood & accepted"
ROFLOL
Brothas to the end hun, loyalty to a fellow knight is second nature !!!
My dear, in order to clarify the case put forward in defence of my fellow knight i'd like to put forward a plea of 'misunderstanding/mixed interpretation' due to the 'grey area' of what was specifically requested and what was merely suggested. As we appear to be at a stalemate with this it seems only fait and right that this case should be adjourned and the sentence relinquished !!!
Nah....nadda...nope!
Anywho, as a man of honour & integrity & I'm surprised that you would consider such a suggestion... to my knowledge... personal honour is all important to your client & he would not (I believe) settle for anything less than total & absolute exoneration of his good name & character & therefore will accept & complete (if he can) another forfeit....M turns from the members of the Jury & takes her seat in front of the bench....
Strong representations from defense and prosecuting council. However as you all know i am a man of honor and i will not be satisfied until i have successfully completed a given task.
I await your decision.
Your man in Panama.
Jury, my learned colleague has put quiet a case forward but as she has rightfully said, my client is an honorable man and would never go back on his word IF the subject matter was crystal clear. All i have humbly pointed out is that in this instance the matter is not as clear as is being portrayed so vehemently(i say as i look at Mech and shake my head in disbelief before turning back to the jury)and as such can you honestly convict my client, an upright citizen, of a crime your unsure he has commited? Is it not a matter of innocent till PROVEN guilty or have we become a state that prefer the guilty til proven innocent stance ? I implore you to think long and hard about your decision as the fate of a man we ALL love is in the balance...i rest my case (and with that i look each person in the eye and take my seat)
Post a Comment