Paul has always been a romantic and many of his songs reflect his nature and personality.I’m not saying he’s perfect(who is?) but this man for more than 40 years has brought happiness around the world with his music.

When Paul originally met Heather he didn’t imagine just what a problem was sitting next to him. Heather is a real cocktail regarding her behaviour and she will prove a problem for any man who enters her life.

She didn’t have to marry Paul but made a decision to be his wife ,and later she showed just how bitchy and ignorant she is by trying to slag him off in the public arena.
Paul has employed numerous people at his residences over the years ,and I believe that the vast majority would confirm that in their personal daily dealings with Heather that she was often rude or obnoxious towards them. A trouble maker.

Heather Mills is a manipulative, calculating personality, and her regular rants to the media and on the box ,reveal in my opinion, a person who has physcological problems.
It was interesting to read the comments by the judge who stated that the evidence and statements made by Mills were highly inconsistent in the case.

Heather has certainly been successful in one area.Many more people will now be demanding pre nup agreements and a whole lot more will be staying SINGLE.

Not a legal person myself but your ’summing up’ re pants seems accurate

Come to think of it who else do we know whos evidence is inconsistant, inaccurate and less thank candid?? The McScams??

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3575582.ece

Oh dear me! No wonder she wanted it kept quiet

‘Heather Mills’ evidence in her divorce case with Sir Paul McCartney was “inconsistent, inaccurate” and “less than candid”, according to the judge. ‘

According to BBC News

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7302736.stm

Not a legal person but I think that means that her pants were at least smouldering

Oh, the “C” word, missed it!!

Craig said the ‘C’ word

Yes, agree with you that Heath could have behaved in a dignified manner. Why she didn’t beats me. Paul must have been very lonely, but Heather looked OK. On another note, what is it that Craig has done … can’t quite work it out?

I just cannot understand why Paul married her when it was so very obvious what she was. I would say that he was somewhat ’struck’ but cannot elaborate on that after Craig has already lowered the tone this morning.

Poor Bea.

In the early days before the affair was official, Paul and Heather were on a show and Paul said “I like being in bed with you……”. and to the effect that you will do for me. Seemed a very hollow thing to say publicly. Heather has changed though in looks and personality IMO. On TV tonight she was talking about Paul saying he had only 400 million and she felt he had a lot more…he was married to Linda then. It does make one wonder if the child is hers. Bea looks like her Dad.

IMO and allegedly obviously

Craig been mulling over your joke. I’m from a sunburnt cuountry so I understand about these thing.

Administrator: I would agree if you weren’t being such a c*** about it . The occasional joke is fine. Used as a term of abuse, as it would have been in my first sentence, it is not and used repeatedly to make a point is unacceptable. It’s early morning use may have cheesed off the Moderator. I haven’t had the chance to find out, but do us all all a favour and forget it. You’ve made the point and it’s before my breakfast. -agw

i think there is a rprecedent for using it.

and using it a lot.

old Mr Anorak himself uses it liberally and with elan.

apologies to myself in your own good time, and you can re-edit my original posting wiht my fab (four) joke.
okeydokey?