On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 17:37:20 -0700, Peter Wieck wrote:

In this country, there are generally two common definitions of a
"Gentleman": One being the sort who rests his weight on his elbows
whilst screwing someone, and the other being a 'remittance man' sort
who need not work for a living. I would be neither, and would never
claim to it.

You DON'T take the weight on your elbows? Ah well, if you don't
actually wipe your cock on the curtains you may still qualify.

On Sep 20, 2:07 am, Laurence Payne NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 17:37:20 -0700, Peter Wieck wrote:
In this country, there are generally two common definitions of a
"Gentleman": One being the sort who rests his weight on his elbows
whilst screwing someone, and the other being a 'remittance man' sort
who need not work for a living. I would be neither, and would never
claim to it.

You DON'T take the weight on your elbows? Ah well, if you don't
actually wipe your cock on the curtains you may still qualify.

I don't imagine someone as humourless as Worthless Wiecky gets laid
all that often, or, considering his age and girth, at all.

One of the paradoxes of human nature is that men with a sense of
humour do better with women. There is the example of Karl Marx, who
was very ugly, but who had a good sense of humour, and thus a lot of
success with women.

Worthless Wiecky has been ****ting on the carpet in RAT, RAO and UKRA
for two years now. Surely, Laurence, this isn't the first time you've
noticed that the thieving little scumbag isn't a gentleman?

Andre Jute
Pavement pooper scooper enforcer