Discussion:
British Royals -- Uniquely Blunder-Prone?
(too old to reply)
D. Spencer Hines
2005-01-14 19:14:46 UTC
Permalink
Are British Royals uniquely blunder-prone and abnormally stupid [some of
them] or is it just the far more aggressive British Press that creates
these hilarious British Royal Blunders, SNAFU's and Embarrassments -- a
combination of the two?

Other Nations' Royals do not seem to be as pig-ignorantly foolish and
fanatically self-destructive as the British Royals.

Fergie The Slut, Duchess of York -- surely one of the most abysmally
air-headed of them all. See Below.

You Brits might just want to replace this bad lot -- bring back the
Stuarts?

The current heir seems to be a chap in Liechtenstein

Consider -- this Hanover lot has run into the sands and petered out on
you.

Josef Wenzel v.u. zu Liechtenstein -- take a look at him, Brits -- you
could do MUCH worse with this Hanover lot you've inherited and probably
WILL. JOSEPH I, the Jacobites call him. Joseph is reported to be an
11th great-grandson of Charles I.

He's only NINE years old -- TRAINABLE.

Hell, he also probably speaks better English than your GEORGE I ever
did.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor
-------------------------

'Diana would be proud'
By Stephen Deal, Metro
14 January 2005

"The Duchess of York leapt to the defence of Prince Harry over his Nazi
costume blunder yesterday, saying: 'His mother would be proud of him.'

Hilarious! Fergie The Airheaded prolongs the agony for the Queen,
Prince Philip and Prince Charles -- keeping the story alive. ---- DSH

The prince's aunt said he 'deserved a break' and added: 'I am behind him
100 per cent. OK, he wore a fancy dress costume, he got it wrong. I
hope the world accepts his apology.' ******

"I am behind him 100 per cent." ?????

This woman is as DUMB as they come. ---- DSH

A photo on the front page of yesterday's Sun newspaper showed the
20-year-old Royal enjoying a drink and a cigarette while dressed as a
member of Rommel's Afrika Corps, complete with red swastika armband.

In a statement, Harry said: 'I am very sorry if I caused any offence or
embarrassment to anyone. It was a poor choice of costume and I
apologise.'

"IF I caused any offence or embarrassment to anyone..." !!!!! -- What An
Idiot Prince Harry Is -- still digging a DEEPER HOLE for himself. ----
DSH

The Ministry of Defence insisted the incident would not affect Harry's
place at Sandhurst military academy, which he is expected to take up in
May.

IT WOULD affect the CANDIDACY of any OTHER applicant to SANDHURST. NOW,
the Royal Family has THAT issue, the issue of blatant, Royal FAVORITISM
to deal with. ---- DSH

The Duchess said she sympathised with the prince because she had made
similar errors of judgment in the past.

She told a US TV channel: 'I know what it is like to have bad press - I
had it for quite a long time.

'But Harry is a great boy, he really is. He is first rate. He does so
much to help so many children all over the world.' However, her comments
appeared to do little to calm the controversy.

HILARIOUS! No kidding. She is pouring PETROL on the FIRE! ---- DSH

The Simon Wiesenthal Centre, one of the largest international Jewish
human rights organisations, said the prince should attend a ceremony at
Auschwitz later this month to mark the 60th anniversary of the death
camp's liberation by allied troops. In a strongly worded rebuke, the
US-based centre added: 'This was a shameful act, displaying
insensitivity for the victims, not just for those soldiers of his own
country who gave their lives to defeat Nazism but to the Holocaust
victims.'

CORRECT! ---- DSH

Israeli foreign minister Silvan Shalom described Harry's use of Nazi
symbols as intolerable. 'This can encourage others to think that
perhaps that period was not as bad as we teach the young generation,' he
said.

RIGHT! The teaching of Modern European History in Britain must be in
the toilet. ---- DSH

Prince Charles was reported to have privately berated Harry but told an
aide his son did not need to grovel and apologise further. Charles was
also said to feel Prince William should have stopped his brother from
wearing the costume."
--------------------

WRONG! Prince Harry DOES need to GROVEL FURTHER -- ASAP. He hasn't
even BEGUN to grovel properly.

OF COURSE Prince William should have STOPPED HIM. He's an idiot too.

More fun and games with the British Royals. They exist primarily to
entertain the World.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor
tiglath
2005-01-14 19:19:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Are British Royals uniquely blunder-prone and abnormally stupid
As things are taking a turn for the worse in Iraq, and only habituation
and apathy keeps good Americans from dishing to Republicans and the
Bush administration their just desserts, Mr. Hines becomes s.h.m.'s own
National Enquirer.

Greener Pastures.
What's next Mr. Hines, S.h.m.'s Worst Dressed List?

Go on.
William Black
2005-01-14 19:24:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Other Nations' Royals do not seem to be as pig-ignorantly foolish and
fanatically self-destructive as the British Royals.
Oh I don't know, the heir to Japan was all over the papers last month.

Most royal families were so inept that they either got themselves killed
when the population has a fit of indignation (Russia, France) or got the
sack for supporting a war where they got thrashed (Italy, Germany) or even
won (Yugoslavia, Albainia)

Ours has the ability not to offned to the extent that people take shots at
them or put them on trial.
Post by D. Spencer Hines
You Brits might just want to replace this bad lot -- bring back the
Stuarts?
Ah, now there's a dynasty that had a real ability to piss off the people,
even after being thrown out, not once but twice...
--
William Black

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe
Barbeques on fire by chalets past the headland
I've watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off Newborough
All this will pass like ice-cream on the beach
Time for tea
tiglath
2005-01-14 19:52:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Black
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Other Nations' Royals do not seem to be as pig-ignorantly foolish and
fanatically self-destructive as the British Royals.
Oh I don't know, the heir to Japan was all over the papers last month.
Hitler is dead. We won.

Taking jokes about him seriously is like resucitating the fear he
inspired. It's morbid.

Reducing him to a joke, to a fancy dress, to a prank is the proper way
to frame the Evil Thousand Year Reich, if we must recall Nazis at all.
All else is an argument from outrage, where anger functions as a
premise and the object is to focus outrage on a easy target. For
example: "After 9/11 we had to do something." Prince Harry is another
easy target for anger that should have been long quenched. Hitler is
dead. Nuremberg is over. I said OVER.

"Lest we forget" is bullshit, as Rwandans know.

Would a Stalin uniform have cause the same uproar? Stalin murdered
MANY more people than Hitler.

How about a Gengis Khan costume?

Neither killed six million Jews, but plenty of other people, each of
whom are, or ought to be, worth as much as a Jew.

Are they?
Julian Richards
2005-01-14 21:29:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by tiglath
Hitler is dead. We won.
Taking jokes about him seriously is like resucitating the fear he
inspired. It's morbid.
Reducing him to a joke, to a fancy dress, to a prank is the proper way
to frame the Evil Thousand Year Reich, if we must recall Nazis at all.
All else is an argument from outrage, where anger functions as a
premise and the object is to focus outrage on a easy target. For
example: "After 9/11 we had to do something." Prince Harry is another
easy target for anger that should have been long quenched. Hitler is
dead. Nuremberg is over. I said OVER.
"Lest we forget" is bullshit, as Rwandans know.
Would a Stalin uniform have cause the same uproar? Stalin murdered
MANY more people than Hitler.
How about a Gengis Khan costume?
Neither killed six million Jews, but plenty of other people, each of
whom are, or ought to be, worth as much as a Jew.
Are they?
Freddie Starr dressed up as Hitler to play the fool, being one of the
first to change Hitler from a figure of fear to one of ridicule in the
UK. It makes him even less attractive to those who wish to emulate
him.

My late father dressed up as Hitler for the end of a village party to
commemorate the war and the Canadian antiaircraft gun crew that were
based there (God knows why as it was all fields although Bletchley
Park was not too far away). It was in the spirit of the event and he
had been dressed up as Home Guard for the earlier part of the evening.



--

Julian Richards
medieval "at" richardsuk.f9.co.uk

Usenet is how from the comfort of your own living room, you can converse
with people that you would never want in your house.

THIS MESSAGE WAS POSTED FROM SOC.HISTORY.MEDIEVAL
Matthew Harley
2005-01-15 21:43:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by tiglath
Reducing him to a joke, to a fancy dress, to a prank is the proper way
to frame the Evil Thousand Year Reich, if we must recall Nazis at all.
Funny enough that was my reaction.

When I heard what Harry had done I thought of Charlie
Chaplin's "The Great Dictator" for which Chaplin took some
of the same stick, ironically, it sems, at the time because
some thought Germany would be offended!:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAchaplinC.htm

"A strong opponent of racism, in 1937 Chaplin decided to
make a film on the dangers of fascism. As Chaplin pointed
out in his autobiography, attempts were made to stop the
film being made: "Half-way through making The Great Dictator
I began receiving alarming messages from United Artists.
They had been advised by the Hays Office that I would run
into censorship trouble. Also the English office was very
concerned about an anti-Hitler picture and doubted whether
it could be shown in Britain. But I was determined to go
ahead, for Hitler must be laughed at." However, by the time
The Great Dictator was finished, Britain was at war with
Germany and it was used as propaganda against Hitler."

and Mel Brooks' "Springtime for Hitler!

"
"I was never crazy about Hitler, "says Mel Brooks. Who was?
But even now, more than 50 years after the fall of the Third
Reich, the man who masterminded the extermination of more
than 7 million people is still handled with care, as if the
magnitude of his crime demands no less. Brooks had the guts,
and gall, to realize that the simplest way to demolish
Hitler was to mock him."

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/doubleissue/heroes/brooks.htm

Thousands of people have been dressing up as Nazis/Hitlers
at fancy-dress parties all over the planet for the last 50
plus years because Hitler needed to be MOCKED!

When people dress up as the devil at fancy parties, does
that mean they are evil?

Or are they just taking the piss!

Tabloid newspapers, get a life!

Matt Harley
tiglath
2005-01-16 01:32:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Harley
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/doubleissue/heroes/brooks.htm
Thousands of people have been dressing up as Nazis/Hitlers
at fancy-dress parties all over the planet for the last 50
plus years because Hitler needed to be MOCKED!
When people dress up as the devil at fancy parties, does
that mean they are evil?
Or are they just taking the piss!
Tabloid newspapers, get a life!
Matt Harley
Tabloid Hines wishes he could.
l***@yahoo.com
2005-01-16 01:43:11 UTC
Permalink
I wasn't going to jump into this but...Harry needs what anyone his age
who does this sort of stupid and thoughtless thing needs: a lesson in
the consequences: the people who died were real, the killers were real,
and real people today are affected.
A trip to the Holocaust Museum might not be a bad holiday for him,
especially if he is allowed to go through it anonymously so he'll have
a chance to actually think about and feel what he sees there. Once he
has seen the consequences of his thoughtlessness and has had a chance
to review the "wisdom" of his action, it needs to be forgotten by
everyone except Harry. I hope that the reaction to what he did will not
outshine what he has been given an opportunity to learn. Bronwen (who
tries to help her sister-in-law do genealogy when most of her recent
ancestors were killed by the Nazis)
The Rev**d
2005-01-16 03:52:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I wasn't going to jump into this but...Harry needs what anyone his age
who does this sort of stupid and thoughtless thing needs: a lesson in
the consequences: the people who died were real, the killers were real,
and real people today are affected.
A trip to the Holocaust Museum might not be a bad holiday for him,
especially if he is allowed to go through it anonymously so he'll have
a chance to actually think about and feel what he sees there. Once he
has seen the consequences of his thoughtlessness and has had a chance
to review the "wisdom" of his action, it needs to be forgotten by
everyone except Harry. I hope that the reaction to what he did will not
outshine what he has been given an opportunity to learn. Bronwen (who
tries to help her sister-in-law do genealogy when most of her recent
ancestors were killed by the Nazis)
We, in this country, do not pander to jew sensitivities.

HTH
HAND
William Black
2005-01-16 12:04:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Rev**d
We, in this country, do not pander to jew sensitivities.
I thought you lived in Texas.
--
William Black

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe
Barbeques on fire by chalets past the headland
I've watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off Newborough
All this will pass like ice-cream on the beach
Time for tea
a.spencer3
2005-01-16 10:06:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I wasn't going to jump into this but...Harry needs what anyone his age
who does this sort of stupid and thoughtless thing needs: a lesson in
the consequences: the people who died were real, the killers were real,
and real people today are affected.
A trip to the Holocaust Museum might not be a bad holiday for him,
especially if he is allowed to go through it anonymously so he'll have
a chance to actually think about and feel what he sees there. Once he
has seen the consequences of his thoughtlessness and has had a chance
to review the "wisdom" of his action, it needs to be forgotten by
everyone except Harry. I hope that the reaction to what he did will not
outshine what he has been given an opportunity to learn. Bronwen (who
tries to help her sister-in-law do genealogy when most of her recent
ancestors were killed by the Nazis)
Most posters here probably have not been to the Holocaust Museum, and don't
need to, to realise the atrocities etc.
I have been and, frankly, found it far too propogandist for its own good.
Any other visitors' views?

Surreyman

Surreyman
D. Spencer Hines
2005-01-14 19:53:44 UTC
Permalink
"Harry 'Out Of Control'"

And the beat goes on....

"HOORAY IDIOTS", Aye....

DSH
---------------------

"Harry 'out of control'"

By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard, Royal Correspondent
14 January 2005

"Close friends of Prince Harry fear he is "out of control". They say he
is surrounded by a group of "hooray idiots" who are encouraging his
increasingly reckless behaviour.

Their concern comes as Prince Charles today refused to make Harry
apologise in public for wearing a Nazi swastika and German uniform at a
fancy-dress party. The Prince of Wales says he will not force Harry to
visit Auschwitz or to say sorry on TV. Charles feels his son is being
pilloried for a silly prank.

PRINCE CHARLES IS IN DENIAL. ---- DSH

But in an unprecedented intervention, one of Harry's closest friends
says it was only the latest in a long line of ill-advised stunts, most
of which have remained out of the public eye. Today the friend says:
"Those of us who know him best are worried that he is behaving like an
idiot.

LISTEN to this fellow, CHARLES, or you are as stupid as your SON. ----
DSH

"The problem is he is surrounded by people who are in awe of him and do
not question his behaviour. Some of them certainly encourage him to
carry out more and more ridiculous stunts.

"He is always the first one to misbehave at a party, always the first to
be falling down drunk. If there is a fountain at a party, you know he
will be the first in it."

Harry's name has become a byword for outrageous behaviour among his
public school peers, and some friends believe he now feels compelled to
"act up" to this role.

OF COURSE. ---- DSH

The friend added: "He is not a bright chap. You have to be seriously
academically challenged to come away from Eton with one A-level. That
lack of intelligence is manifesting itself in the decisions he is making
now."

HILARIOUS! ---- DSH

"He needs to distance himself from certain people around him and
question why they are egging him on."

The Evening Standard source is one of Harry's longest-standing friends
and a family friend of Prince Charles. ******

The source went on: "He is not a bad lad, but he is getting wilder and
wilder. This was not malicious, but it was foolish. He needs to get a
grip. He has to realise the reality of his position."

The outrage over 20-year-old Harry's stunt continues to reverberate
around the world. But after meeting senior officials, Charles made it
clear that he would refuse to bow to political pressure from senior
politicians, including Tory leader Michael Howard, who are demanding
that Harry make a personal apology.

Charles told senior advisers he will not allow his son to be "hung out
to dry". One senior official told the Standard: "As far as the Prince
is concerned Harry has apologised for his mistake. That is the end of
the matter."

It has been decided that after Clarence House's contrite statement
yesterday nothing more would be added and there will be no gesture such
as a public trip by Harry to the Auschwitz concentration camp.

A bland STATEMENT from Clarence House is NOT a proper apology from Harry
himself -- directly from his lips. ---- DSH

Harry's gaffe was compounded by the timing, which coincides with the
60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz where more than one
million Jews were murdered by the Nazis.

This is to be commemorated later this month in a ceremony attended by
representatives from around the world.

Britain will be sending European minister Denis MacShane. The royal
family will be represented by Prince Edward.

Harry, due to start his military training at Sandhurst in May, is said
to be "deeply upset" over the reaction. A senior source said: "There is
a feeling that although it was a genuine error and certainly ill-advised
he now feels under siege.

"With the benefit of hindsight he knows he was wrong to wear the uniform
and the swastika armband but some among his friends feel it has been
taken out of all proportion. While the Prince of Wales is
understandably disappointed with Harry and has made his feelings very
clear, he is equally adamant that his son should not be hung out to
dry." It is understood that the Queen has rallied behind her grandson
despite the condemnation.

"The Queen will always back her family and is supporting Prince Charles
on whatever course of action he decides is appropriate," said the
source.

Since the death of Diana in 1997, Charles has doted on his younger son.

He has turned to the advice of former Guards officer Mark Dyer to help
steer Harry into adulthood. A source said: "There is now a feeling in
the Prince of Wales's camp that Harry needs a firmer hand to guide him
and the sooner he joins the Army the better."

It is still possible that the royal family may decide to send Harry to
Auschwitz on a private visit should the weight of worldwide criticism
prove too much to ignore. In Israel, the country's top daily newspaper
was flooded with readers' comments accusing the prince of being stupid
and acting in bad taste.

In the US, the New York Post ran the picture of Harry with the headline
Royal Nazi while the Washington Post declared: "Consensus on Prince
Harry's Gaffe: He Knows Nothing."

It emerged that Harry hired his costume at a shop close to Highgrove,
Maud's Cotswold Costumes, popular with the young royals and their set.

Among the other outfits which were said to have caught the prince's eye
was the uniform of an SS officer." ******
----------------------

He's an uneducated idiot.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor
tiglath
2005-01-14 20:00:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
"Harry 'Out Of Control'"
And the beat goes on....
"HOORAY IDIOTS", Aye....
DSH
---------------------
"Harry 'out of control'"
By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard, Royal Correspondent
14 January 2005
"Close friends of Prince Harry fear he is "out of control". They say he
is surrounded by a group of "hooray idiots" who are encouraging his
increasingly reckless behaviour.
Their concern comes as Prince Charles today refused to make Harry
apologise in public for wearing a Nazi swastika and German uniform at a
fancy-dress party. The Prince of Wales says he will not force Harry to
visit Auschwitz or to say sorry on TV. Charles feels his son is being
pilloried for a silly prank.
PRINCE CHARLES IS IN DENIAL. ---- DSH
Mr. Hines is so old and decrepit that he can't recall anymore what is
like to be twenty years old.

Prince Harry may have offended sensitivities that should not be so
sensitive any longer, but no harm came of it. Compared that with the
judgement of a grown man like Tony Blair who remains "absolutely
convinced" that there are WMD in Iraq and that they will be found some
day (or does he still?). And on that belief he took his reluctant
country to war at a great cost in money and lives.

Mr. Hines is working overtime to condemn a youngster's prank when the
big elephant of Iraq is sitting next to him, pouring with blood.
As they say in England, penny wise, pound foolish.
tiglath
2005-01-14 20:04:44 UTC
Permalink
D. Spencer Hines wrote:
oung royals and their set.
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Among the other outfits which were said to have caught the prince's eye
was the uniform of an SS officer." ******
Alexander the Great wore the clothes of the peoples he vanquished. Why
is it so wrong for a Brit to wear a Nazi uniform in jest, you idiot?
tiglath
2005-01-14 20:28:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
He's an uneducated idiot.
Why go to England looking for idiots when we have them aplenty at home?


Take U.S. Army Specialist Charles A. Graner Jr., who beat and abused
powerless prisoners in Iraq, now on trial.

He is such an unmitigated idiot that he sent emails home and to friends
with photographs of his evil deeds with humorous captions. Like:

"Try doing this at home, and they'll lock you up if you don't have some
type of license,"

And

"Not only was I the healer, I was the hurter. O well life goes on."

And more.

A perfect audit trail for the prosecutor. I would like to know what
this disgraceful man's defense attorney told him about the emails. How
do you defend against that?

Now THAT's an IDIOT. A dangerous one.

Let us see what American justice does about him.

The jury is composed of veteran soldiers, all male.

Here is a good chance for them to show that soldiering is a profession
with standards of conduct that need to be upheld.

Why write so much about some idiot abroad, Mr. Hines, when they grow on
trees at home?
Michael W Cook
2005-01-15 00:18:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
"Harry 'Out Of Control'"
And the beat goes on....
"HOORAY IDIOTS", Aye....
DSH
---------------------
"Harry 'out of control'"
By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard, Royal Correspondent
14 January 2005
"Close friends of Prince Harry fear he is "out of control". They say he
is surrounded by a group of "hooray idiots" who are encouraging his
increasingly reckless behaviour.
Their concern comes as Prince Charles today refused to make Harry
apologise in public for wearing a Nazi swastika and German uniform at a
fancy-dress party. The Prince of Wales says he will not force Harry to
visit Auschwitz or to say sorry on TV. Charles feels his son is being
pilloried for a silly prank.
PRINCE CHARLES IS IN DENIAL. ---- DSH
Bollocks.

Price Charles realises that wearing a Nazi uniform as a joke fancy dress has
absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Jews or the Holocaust.

Why the hell should be be sent to visit Auschwitz ?

Anyone would think that it was only Jews who died in WWII, none of the other
millions of victims get a mention these days and everyone has to tread on
egg-shells for fear of offending them.

It wasn't the Gays, Gypsies, Poles, Czechs, Scandinavians or Russians that
Harry offended, or the people of London who had their city bombed to rubble
around them by the Nazis, oh no, it was the Jews, only the Jews he offended.

Of course the media plays along by falling over themselves to get a quote
from a professional 'Jew', who will inevitably tell us how offended ALL Jews
will be and then bang on about Auschwitz for a few minutes.

Job done.

Jewish/Zionist groups have turned the Holocaust into an industry, and their
relatives who died under the Nazis would turn in their graves if they could
see how their memory is used and abused by these groups today.

Harry's actions in wearing a Nazi Uniform as Fancy Dress to a private party
can only be described as inappropriate and insensitive for someone of his
position in society.

Nothing more.

MWC
r***@bellsouth.net
2005-01-15 00:22:52 UTC
Permalink
Typical of Cook to Goose step in where normal people wouldn't. Got your Doc
Martins on ass clown?
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by D. Spencer Hines
"Harry 'Out Of Control'"
And the beat goes on....
"HOORAY IDIOTS", Aye....
DSH
---------------------
"Harry 'out of control'"
By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard, Royal Correspondent
14 January 2005
"Close friends of Prince Harry fear he is "out of control". They say he
is surrounded by a group of "hooray idiots" who are encouraging his
increasingly reckless behaviour.
Their concern comes as Prince Charles today refused to make Harry
apologise in public for wearing a Nazi swastika and German uniform at a
fancy-dress party. The Prince of Wales says he will not force Harry to
visit Auschwitz or to say sorry on TV. Charles feels his son is being
pilloried for a silly prank.
PRINCE CHARLES IS IN DENIAL. ---- DSH
Bollocks.
Price Charles realises that wearing a Nazi uniform as a joke fancy dress has
absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Jews or the Holocaust.
Why the hell should be be sent to visit Auschwitz ?
Anyone would think that it was only Jews who died in WWII, none of the other
millions of victims get a mention these days and everyone has to tread on
egg-shells for fear of offending them.
It wasn't the Gays, Gypsies, Poles, Czechs, Scandinavians or Russians that
Harry offended, or the people of London who had their city bombed to rubble
around them by the Nazis, oh no, it was the Jews, only the Jews he offended.
Of course the media plays along by falling over themselves to get a quote
from a professional 'Jew', who will inevitably tell us how offended ALL Jews
will be and then bang on about Auschwitz for a few minutes.
Job done.
Jewish/Zionist groups have turned the Holocaust into an industry, and their
relatives who died under the Nazis would turn in their graves if they could
see how their memory is used and abused by these groups today.
Harry's actions in wearing a Nazi Uniform as Fancy Dress to a private party
can only be described as inappropriate and insensitive for someone of his
position in society.
Nothing more.
MWC
Michael W Cook
2005-01-15 02:28:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
Typical of Cook to Goose step in where normal people wouldn't. Got your Doc
Martins on ass clown?
Me, Goose Step ?

Ladies and Gentlemen

This is OJ Goldman, a Redneck from the set of 'Deliverance' who travels to
Israel, dons an IDF uniform and fights for a country that is not the nation
of his birth.

He's a mercenary in other words.

Some would call him a traitor.

Even when he was a small boy Goldman's Rabbi could see what a little prick
he was, so when he was circumcised he chopped off a little too much so it
matched his character.

Poor OJ.

Now all he has left is a stump, and there isn't a Jewish woman on earth who
would piss on him if he was on fire.

Hilarious.

MWC
r***@bellsouth.net
2005-01-15 02:45:37 UTC
Permalink
ROFLOL look up the word Mercenary..
look it up , you don't even know the meaning of the word you so freely tag
me with you nazi cum stain
On 15/1/05 12:22 am, in article
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
Typical of Cook to Goose step in where normal people wouldn't. Got your Doc
Martins on ass clown?
Me, Goose Step ?
Ladies and Gentlemen
This is OJ Goldman, a Redneck from the set of 'Deliverance' who travels to
Israel, dons an IDF uniform and fights for a country that is not the nation
of his birth.
He's a mercenary in other words.
Some would call him a traitor.
Even when he was a small boy Goldman's Rabbi could see what a little prick
he was, so when he was circumcised he chopped off a little too much so it
matched his character.
Poor OJ.
Now all he has left is a stump, and there isn't a Jewish woman on earth who
would piss on him if he was on fire.
Hilarious.
MWC
Michael W Cook
2005-01-15 11:24:39 UTC
Permalink
mer·ce·nar·y ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mûrs-nr)
adj.
1.. Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain.
2.. Hired for service in a foreign army.
That's you alright - Born in America, yet you fight for Israel, a foreign
power and NOT the country of your birth.
n. pl. mer·ce·nar·ies
1.. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
2.. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.
You again, Israel was NOT the country of your birth.

You're a hireling alright - You're nothing but Canon-Fodder.

Expendable.

No use to man or beast.

A Loser.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Middle English mercenarie, a mercenary, from Old French mercenaire,
from Latin mercnnrius, from mercs, wages, price.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
merce·nari·ly adv.
merce·nari·ness n.
[Download or Buy Now]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language,
Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
mercenary
adj 1: marked by materialism [syn: materialistic, worldly-minded] 2: used of
soldiers hired by a foreign army [syn: mercenary(a), freelance(a)] 3: profit
oriented; "a commercial book"; "preached a mercantile and militant
patriotism"- John Buchan; "a mercenary enterprise"; "a moneymaking business"
[syn: mercantile, moneymaking(a)] n : a person hired to fight for another
country than their own [syn: soldier of fortune]
You again, quite why you deny it is beyond me.


MWC
hippo
2005-01-15 16:47:29 UTC
Permalink
"Michael W Cook" wrote in message
Post by Michael W Cook
mer·ce·nar·y ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mûrs-nr)
adj.
1.. Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain.
2.. Hired for service in a foreign army.
That's you alright - Born in America, yet you fight for Israel, a foreign
power and NOT the country of your birth.
n. pl. mer·ce·nar·ies
1.. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
2.. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.
You again, Israel was NOT the country of your birth.
So what. No one would choose to fight in the IDF for money. The US army pays
much better, is better set up and comfortable, and not nearly as risky. Many
Jews in the US have dual US-Israeli citizenship. The US pilots who fought in
the RAF and RCAF in WWII, and the Lafayette Escadrille in the first war,
certainly were not in it for money. -the Troll
r***@bellsouth.net
2005-01-15 17:37:43 UTC
Permalink
Hippo .. the Yanks in the RAF were not Jews... now you see the dif?
as for serving in the IDF as a Merc! ROFLOL I'd have done better in Africa
if I was a hired gun
Post by hippo
"Michael W Cook" wrote in message
Post by Michael W Cook
mer·ce·nar·y ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mûrs-nr)
adj.
1.. Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain.
2.. Hired for service in a foreign army.
That's you alright - Born in America, yet you fight for Israel, a foreign
power and NOT the country of your birth.
n. pl. mer·ce·nar·ies
1.. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
2.. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.
You again, Israel was NOT the country of your birth.
So what. No one would choose to fight in the IDF for money. The US army pays
much better, is better set up and comfortable, and not nearly as risky. Many
Jews in the US have dual US-Israeli citizenship. The US pilots who fought in
the RAF and RCAF in WWII, and the Lafayette Escadrille in the first war,
certainly were not in it for money. -the Troll
Michael W Cook
2005-01-15 19:21:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
Hippo .. the Yanks in the RAF were not Jews... now you see the dif?
as for serving in the IDF as a Merc! ROFLOL I'd have done better in Africa
if I was a hired gun
OJ a 'Hired Gun' ?

Now THAT is hilarious.

No professional outfit would hire him to wash the dishes, the IDF only do
because they are desperate and use him as cannon-fodder.

MWC
r***@bellsouth.net
2005-01-15 19:42:49 UTC
Permalink
contradicting yourself as usual. one second I'm a merc the next a
dishwasher?

aren't you the same ass clown that wished I got horribly wounded on my last
tour of reserves?
yup same turd
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
Hippo .. the Yanks in the RAF were not Jews... now you see the dif?
as for serving in the IDF as a Merc! ROFLOL I'd have done better in Africa
if I was a hired gun
OJ a 'Hired Gun' ?
Now THAT is hilarious.
No professional outfit would hire him to wash the dishes, the IDF only do
because they are desperate and use him as cannon-fodder.
MWC
hippo
2005-01-15 23:03:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
Hippo .. the Yanks in the RAF were not Jews... now you see the dif?
as for serving in the IDF as a Merc! ROFLOL I'd have done better in Africa
if I was a hired gun
Some may have been. I don't know and don't think the Brits or Canadians were
in a position or disposition to ask. You could have made more money waiting
tables. I, for one, take my hat off to you, sir. -the Troll
r***@bellsouth.net
2005-01-16 00:44:31 UTC
Permalink
No need to take off your hat just for little old me.;-)
But thank you . honestly thank you . some of these folks don't get it.
but I'm glad you did
Post by Deborah Sharavi
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
Hippo .. the Yanks in the RAF were not Jews... now you see the dif?
as for serving in the IDF as a Merc! ROFLOL I'd have done better in
Africa
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
if I was a hired gun
Some may have been. I don't know and don't think the Brits or Canadians were
in a position or disposition to ask. You could have made more money waiting
tables. I, for one, take my hat off to you, sir. -the Troll
William Black
2005-01-16 12:01:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
Hippo .. the Yanks in the RAF were not Jews...
At least one that I know of was...
--
William Black

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe
Barbeques on fire by chalets past the headland
I've watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off Newborough
All this will pass like ice-cream on the beach
Time for tea
Michael W Cook
2005-01-15 19:15:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by hippo
"Michael W Cook" wrote in message
Post by Michael W Cook
mer·ce·nar·y ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mûrs-nr)
adj.
1.. Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain.
2.. Hired for service in a foreign army.
That's you alright - Born in America, yet you fight for Israel, a foreign
power and NOT the country of your birth.
n. pl. mer·ce·nar·ies
1.. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
2.. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.
You again, Israel was NOT the country of your birth.
So what. No one would choose to fight in the IDF for money.
OJ did, and also for the promise of an Israeli passport.
Post by hippo
The US army pays
much better, is better set up and comfortable, and not nearly as risky.
Oj's too thick to realise that.

Besides, he was in the US Navy, but they'd had enough of him and got rid of
him. In fact, most people OJ meets soon dump him, including his ex-wife.
On the Israeli and Palestinian groups where he posts, most of his fellow
Zionists disown him and want nothing to do with him.

He's an ignorant arsehole who can barely string a sentence together - that
earlier post of his you read was only long because he copied it.
Post by hippo
Many
Jews in the US have dual US-Israeli citizenship.
Perhaps you haven't noticed, but many of the illegal settlers in the West
Bank speak with an American accent and also have duel US/Israeli
citizenship, they are also one of the main causes of the conflict.
Post by hippo
The US pilots who fought in
the RAF and RCAF in WWII, and the Lafayette Escadrille in the first war,
certainly were not in it for money. -the Troll
They were fighting a common enemy at the time, OJ isn't.

MWC
hippo
2005-01-15 23:20:22 UTC
Permalink
"Michael W Cook" wrote in message
Post by Michael W Cook
Perhaps you haven't noticed, but many of the illegal settlers in the West
Bank speak with an American accent and also have duel US/Israeli
citizenship, they are also one of the main causes of the conflict.
Post by hippo
The US pilots who fought in
the RAF and RCAF in WWII, and the Lafayette Escadrille in the first war,
certainly were not in it for money. -the Troll
They were fighting a common enemy at the time, OJ isn't.
I don't know your OJ but it takes guts to serve in the IDF and no sane
person would do it for either money or a passport or anything but
conviction. I met a father in Israel who's eldest son was about to be
inducted into the army. The man's face was gray with concern and with good
reason. The weak in spirit are going the other way. -the Troll
Michael W Cook
2005-01-16 00:29:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by hippo
"Michael W Cook" wrote in message
Post by Michael W Cook
Perhaps you haven't noticed, but many of the illegal settlers in the West
Bank speak with an American accent and also have duel US/Israeli
citizenship, they are also one of the main causes of the conflict.
Post by hippo
The US pilots who fought in
the RAF and RCAF in WWII, and the Lafayette Escadrille in the first war,
certainly were not in it for money. -the Troll
They were fighting a common enemy at the time, OJ isn't.
I don't know your OJ but it takes guts to serve in the IDF and no sane
person would do it for either money or a passport or anything but
conviction. I met a father in Israel who's eldest son was about to be
inducted into the army. The man's face was gray with concern and with good
reason. The weak in spirit are going the other way. -the Troll
There's only one answer to that:

If Israel weren't occupying land illegally, and weren't allowing a bunch of
Zioniost religious whackos to live in their illegal settlements, then they
wouldn't need all those boys to do military service.

Simple.

MWC
hippo
2005-01-16 17:51:46 UTC
Permalink
"Michael W Cook" wrote in message
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by hippo
Post by Michael W Cook
Perhaps you haven't noticed, but many of the illegal settlers in the West
Bank speak with an American accent and also have duel US/Israeli
citizenship, they are also one of the main causes of the conflict.
Post by hippo
The US pilots who fought in
the RAF and RCAF in WWII, and the Lafayette Escadrille in the first war,
certainly were not in it for money. -the Troll
They were fighting a common enemy at the time, OJ isn't.
I don't know your OJ but it takes guts to serve in the IDF and no sane
person would do it for either money or a passport or anything but
conviction. I met a father in Israel who's eldest son was about to be
inducted into the army. The man's face was gray with concern and with good
reason. The weak in spirit are going the other way. -the Troll
If Israel weren't occupying land illegally, and weren't allowing a bunch of
Zioniost religious whackos to live in their illegal settlements, then they
wouldn't need all those boys to do military service.
Simple.
You are kidding, right? Do you really think that if the settlements were to
be abandoned Hezbollah, Hamas, and the several Palestinian nationalist and
fundamentalist organizations are going to abandon their jihad? If you do you
are sadly mistaken. They exist for perpetuating the conflict just like the
leadership of any terrorist organization. It is their life purpose and
access for their leadership to power and money. While we agree about the
disruptive acts of radical Zionists, they have nothing on radical Islamic
jihadists and they represent a far smaller percentage of the population from
which they come. In several weeks in Israel I never met even one Zionist.

The IDF at present strengths will be necessary for the foreseeable future.
Israel will never truly be safe because of the unpredictable future
attitudes of politically unstable neighboring states as well as the ongoing
terrorist threat.

Your original post called a poster a mercenary for serving in the IDF which
is simply wrong regardless of the legality of Israeli occupation of
Palestinian territory. You may disagree with him and dislike him, but he
ain't a mercenary any more than the US pilots who served with the RAF before
the US entered the war. -the Troll
a.spencer3
2005-01-16 18:15:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by hippo
In several weeks in Israel I never met even one Zionist.
Then where the xxxxx did you go?
Zionism is merely the supporting of the ideal of a Jewish state in
Palestine. Most Israelis support that!!!

Surreyman
hippo
2005-01-17 02:16:11 UTC
Permalink
"a.spencer3" wrote in message
"hippo" wrote in message
Post by hippo
In several weeks in Israel I never met even one Zionist.
Then where the xxxxx did you go?
Zionism is merely the supporting of the ideal of a Jewish state in
Palestine. Most Israelis support that!!!
That's not how I understand the term. To me Zionists are ultra-nationalists
who are the folks setting up settlements in Palestinian territory and trying
to force the government's hand to support them. The folks I visited were
Ashkenazi Liberals. The two societies don't mix. -the Troll
a.spencer3
2005-01-17 09:58:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by hippo
"a.spencer3" wrote in message
"hippo" wrote in message
Post by hippo
In several weeks in Israel I never met even one Zionist.
Then where the xxxxx did you go?
Zionism is merely the supporting of the ideal of a Jewish state in
Palestine. Most Israelis support that!!!
That's not how I understand the term. To me Zionists are
ultra-nationalists
Post by hippo
who are the folks setting up settlements in Palestinian territory and trying
to force the government's hand to support them. The folks I visited were
Ashkenazi Liberals. The two societies don't mix. -the Troll
Then look in a dictionary before you continue with this discussion! .......
:-))

Surreyman
hippo
2005-01-17 14:06:27 UTC
Permalink
"a.spencer3" wrote in message
"hippo" wrote in message
Post by hippo
Post by a.spencer3
Post by hippo
In several weeks in Israel I never met even one Zionist.
Then where the xxxxx did you go?
Zionism is merely the supporting of the ideal of a Jewish state in
Palestine. Most Israelis support that!!!
That's not how I understand the term. To me Zionists are
ultra-nationalists
Post by hippo
who are the folks setting up settlements in Palestinian territory and
trying
Post by hippo
to force the government's hand to support them. The folks I visited were
Ashkenazi Liberals. The two societies don't mix. -the Troll
Then look in a dictionary before you continue with this discussion! .......
:-))
Don't have to, I know you are right. -the Troll

Michael W Cook
2005-01-17 01:10:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by hippo
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by hippo
I don't know your OJ but it takes guts to serve in the IDF and no sane
person would do it for either money or a passport or anything but
conviction. I met a father in Israel who's eldest son was about to be
inducted into the army. The man's face was gray with concern and with
good
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by hippo
reason. The weak in spirit are going the other way. -the Troll
If Israel weren't occupying land illegally, and weren't allowing a bunch
of
Post by Michael W Cook
Zioniost religious whackos to live in their illegal settlements, then they
wouldn't need all those boys to do military service.
Simple.
You are kidding, right? Do you really think that if the settlements were to
be abandoned Hezbollah, Hamas, and the several Palestinian nationalist and
fundamentalist organizations are going to abandon their jihad?
Their Jihad is perfectly legitimate, they have a foreign army occupying
their land killing their people and destroying their houses. Their struggle
is as right as the French Resistance was against the Nazis in WWII.

Now if Israel were to remove ALL the illegal settlements, and withdraw All
troops to the pre-67 borders, then there would be a grounding for peace.
Until then, let them reap the rewards as an illegal occupying power, they
get no sympathy from me.
Post by hippo
If you do you
are sadly mistaken. They exist for perpetuating the conflict just like the
leadership of any terrorist organization.
And what of the lunatic settlers armed to the teeth ?

The roads built on Arab land for Jews only ?

The people who occupy these settlements are as fanatical and as mad as any
Nazi or Islamic Fundamentalist.

Then of course we have Israel dropping 1000IB bombs onto residential blocks
of flats - is that not terrorism ?

The illegal assassination of 'Suspect' terrorists - no attempt is EVER made
to arrest them and put them on trial for these alleged activities.

Suspect - Shoot them - Just like the Nazis.

Crowded Market Place - Suspect - Send a missile or tank shell in there.

Then we have the killing of innocent children.

Go to Amnesty International's web site and do a search on 'Palestinian
Children' the accounts of the hundreds of kids who have been murdered by the
IDF will quite shock you.

Or perhaps it won't.

However, nobody is ever charged or held to account for these murders.

Shall I go on ?

The destruction of Palestinian Businesses, Crops, Orchards.
The Bulldozing of houses as a form of 'Collective' punishment.
Suspects held without trial. The torturing of these suspects.

Etc etc etc.............
Post by hippo
It is their life purpose and
access for their leadership to power and money. While we agree about the
disruptive acts of radical Zionists, they have nothing on radical Islamic
jihadists and they represent a far smaller percentage of the population from
which they come. In several weeks in Israel I never met even one Zionist.
You are joking I hope.

99.9% of Jews in the world support Zionism.

I, however, do not.
Post by hippo
The IDF at present strengths will be necessary for the foreseeable future.
Best they pull out of the Occupied Territories and bulldoze the illegal
settlements, then they wouldn't need so many of them.
Post by hippo
Israel will never truly be safe because of the unpredictable future
attitudes of politically unstable neighboring states as well as the ongoing
terrorist threat.
That was a fact recognised by everyone when the Zionist State was formed,
but the guilt of the Western powers after the war got the better of them and
clouded their judgement.

Israel should never have been allowed to exist as a homeland for the Jews,
and if it wasn't for the US propping it up it would have disappeared long
ago, and that would have saved the whole world a hell of a lot of grief.
Post by hippo
Your original post called a poster a mercenary for serving in the IDF which
is simply wrong regardless of the legality of Israeli occupation of
Palestinian territory.
He was born an American, lives in America and holds an American passport,
yet he fights for Israel and receives reward for his services. The fact he
now has an Israeli passport in lieu of his mercenary service is neither here
nor there - he's a mercenary and an arsehole to boot.
Post by hippo
You may disagree with him and dislike him, but he
ain't a mercenary any more than the US pilots who served with the RAF before
the US entered the war. -the Troll
Totally different scenario, just about all of Europe was at war with Nazi
Germany and many of those who flew in the RAF or RCAF had relatives who were
British or Canadian, or were on legitimate postings from their parent units.

MWC
hippo
2005-01-17 02:46:26 UTC
Permalink
"Michael W Cook" wrote in message
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by hippo
Post by Michael W Cook
If Israel weren't occupying land illegally, and weren't allowing a bunch
of
Post by Michael W Cook
Zioniost religious whackos to live in their illegal settlements, then they
wouldn't need all those boys to do military service.
Simple.
You are kidding, right? Do you really think that if the settlements were to
be abandoned Hezbollah, Hamas, and the several Palestinian nationalist and
fundamentalist organizations are going to abandon their jihad?
Their Jihad is perfectly legitimate, they have a foreign army occupying
their land killing their people and destroying their houses. Their struggle
is as right as the French Resistance was against the Nazis in WWII.
Now if Israel were to remove ALL the illegal settlements, and withdraw All
troops to the pre-67 borders, then there would be a grounding for peace.
Until then, let them reap the rewards as an illegal occupying power, they
get no sympathy from me.
No, from your past posts I didn't suspect they would. I agree illegal
settlements should be abandoned and money spent developing the lands they
did win by '67. That won't stop the jihad, though, any more than our pulling
out of the Gulf.
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by hippo
If you do you
are sadly mistaken. They exist for perpetuating the conflict just like the
leadership of any terrorist organization.
And what of the lunatic settlers armed to the teeth ?
The roads built on Arab land for Jews only ?
The people who occupy these settlements are as fanatical and as mad as any
Nazi or Islamic Fundamentalist.
Then of course we have Israel dropping 1000IB bombs onto residential blocks
of flats - is that not terrorism ?
The illegal assassination of 'Suspect' terrorists - no attempt is EVER made
to arrest them and put them on trial for these alleged activities.
Suspect - Shoot them - Just like the Nazis.
Crowded Market Place - Suspect - Send a missile or tank shell in there.
Then we have the killing of innocent children.
Go to Amnesty International's web site and do a search on 'Palestinian
Children' the accounts of the hundreds of kids who have been murdered by the
IDF will quite shock you.
Or perhaps it won't.
However, nobody is ever charged or held to account for these murders.
Shall I go on ?
The destruction of Palestinian Businesses, Crops, Orchards.
The Bulldozing of houses as a form of 'Collective' punishment.
Suspects held without trial. The torturing of these suspects.
Etc etc etc.............
I agree but given the realities since the intifada I see little choice for
Israeli reaction. Britain would do the same under the same level of threat,
any country with a population to protect would. I remind you of Hamburg and
Dresden.
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by hippo
It is their life purpose and
access for their leadership to power and money. While we agree about the
disruptive acts of radical Zionists, they have nothing on radical Islamic
jihadists and they represent a far smaller percentage of the population from
which they come. In several weeks in Israel I never met even one Zionist.
You are joking I hope.
99.9% of Jews in the world support Zionism.
I, however, do not.
Zionists are radical nationalists and are not supported by even some who
live in Israel. There are many more who live outside the place who don't
either.
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by hippo
The IDF at present strengths will be necessary for the foreseeable future.
Best they pull out of the Occupied Territories and bulldoze the illegal
settlements, then they wouldn't need so many of them.
Post by hippo
Israel will never truly be safe because of the unpredictable future
attitudes of politically unstable neighboring states as well as the ongoing
terrorist threat.
That was a fact recognised by everyone when the Zionist State was formed,
but the guilt of the Western powers after the war got the better of them and
clouded their judgement.
Israel should never have been allowed to exist as a homeland for the Jews,
and if it wasn't for the US propping it up it would have disappeared long
ago, and that would have saved the whole world a hell of a lot of grief.
I'll accept that responsibility gladly and proudly. Every people deserves a
homeland if possible. Fact is there is far greater free access to everyone's
holy sites in Jerusalem under Israeli rule than under Palestinian. I had no
problems visiting Christian sites there and the Dome of the Rock was teeming
with Moslem worshipers with not a soldier in sight.
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by hippo
Your original post called a poster a mercenary for serving in the IDF which
is simply wrong regardless of the legality of Israeli occupation of
Palestinian territory.
He was born an American, lives in America and holds an American passport,
yet he fights for Israel and receives reward for his services. The fact he
now has an Israeli passport in lieu of his mercenary service is neither here
nor there - he's a mercenary and an arsehole to boot.
Arsehole he may be, I wouldn't know, but he doesn't fit even the minimum
definition of a mercenary.
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by hippo
You may disagree with him and dislike him, but he
ain't a mercenary any more than the US pilots who served with the RAF before
the US entered the war. -the Troll
Totally different scenario, just about all of Europe was at war with Nazi
Germany and many of those who flew in the RAF or RCAF had relatives who were
British or Canadian, or were on legitimate postings from their parent units.
The fact remains they were foreign nationals serving in another country's
military and getting paid. There is no legal difference. -the Troll
Michael W Cook
2005-01-16 00:38:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by hippo
don't know your OJ but it takes guts to serve in the IDF and no sane
person would do it for either money or a passport or anything but
conviction.
Not at all:

It takes guts to join in the military and serve in combat for your country.

But it takes a coward like Goldman to shoot kids who throw stones.

MWC
William Black
2005-01-16 12:02:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael W Cook
But it takes a coward like Goldman to shoot kids who throw stones.
There's one easy way to stop that.

Kids shouldn't throw stones at soldiers...
--
William Black

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe
Barbeques on fire by chalets past the headland
I've watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off Newborough
All this will pass like ice-cream on the beach
Time for tea
Frances Kemmish
2005-01-16 13:19:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Black
Post by Michael W Cook
But it takes a coward like Goldman to shoot kids who throw stones.
There's one easy way to stop that.
Kids shouldn't throw stones at soldiers...
I guess kids shouldn't harvest strawberries either
Michael W Cook
2005-01-16 14:37:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frances Kemmish
Post by William Black
Post by Michael W Cook
But it takes a coward like Goldman to shoot kids who throw stones.
There's one easy way to stop that.
Kids shouldn't throw stones at soldiers...
I guess kids shouldn't harvest strawberries either
http://www.amnesty.org/results/is/eng


"Killings of Palestinian children"

"The majority of Palestinian children have been killed in the Occupied
Territories when members of the IDF responded to demonstrations and stone
throwing incidents with unlawful and excessive use of lethal force. Eighty
Palestinian children were killed by the IDF in the first three months of the
intifada alone."

MWC
Michael W Cook
2005-01-16 14:26:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Black
Post by Michael W Cook
But it takes a coward like Goldman to shoot kids who throw stones.
There's one easy way to stop that.
Kids shouldn't throw stones at soldiers...
EVERY country in the civilised world has 'Rules of Engagement'.

NONE allows the shooting of children for throwing stones.

MWC
Matthew Harley
2005-01-16 22:17:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Black
Post by Michael W Cook
But it takes a coward like Goldman to shoot kids who throw stones.
There's one easy way to stop that.
Kids shouldn't throw stones at soldiers...
here is the concept of proportionate force in human rights
law. Do you believe that shooting stone-throwing kids is a
use of "proportionate force"?

"Amnesty Warns Of Israeli War Crimes

"He urged both sides to react to attacks with proportionate
force, saying Israeli troops had appeared to move from
firing tear gas to live rounds too quickly. "If a kid is
throwing stones at you, but is not putting any lives at
risk, then you do not shoot him," he said.""
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/110200-01.htm

I have noted that you seem to be a leftist person with
liberal views which dry up when Israeli excesses are
criticised.

You may be a Jewish left-wing person who can't see through
Israeli propaganda.

If true, that's unusual because Jewish left-leaning people
have been among the most vociferous critics of fascist
Sharon!

Would you please explain yourself.


Matt Harley
hippo
2005-01-16 17:59:52 UTC
Permalink
"Michael W Cook" wrote in message
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by hippo
don't know your OJ but it takes guts to serve in the IDF and no sane
person would do it for either money or a passport or anything but
conviction.
It takes guts to join in the military and serve in combat for your country.
But it takes a coward like Goldman to shoot kids who throw stones.
The likelihood of combat for the IDF is ever present. Just look at their
casualty figures. I don't think it is ever the purpose of the IDF to shoot
children throwing stones and neither does any reasonable person. Molotov
cocktails and RPGs are quite different. The IDF does considerable training
to prevent the accidental shooting of the innocent (non threatening) but as
long as it remains necessary for IDF forces to enter populous areas it is
going to happen. -the Troll
r***@bellsouth.net
2005-01-16 00:46:36 UTC
Permalink
Cook calls me OJ . the Name is R.J.,,,, he must think it is a Dig on me
since OJ killed a Goldman and is now living in Florida, Cook thinks he can
rankle me. but hell I've seen far worse then this idiot cook can bring on !
Post by hippo
"Michael W Cook" wrote in message
Post by Michael W Cook
Perhaps you haven't noticed, but many of the illegal settlers in the West
Bank speak with an American accent and also have duel US/Israeli
citizenship, they are also one of the main causes of the conflict.
Post by hippo
The US pilots who fought in
the RAF and RCAF in WWII, and the Lafayette Escadrille in the first war,
certainly were not in it for money. -the Troll
They were fighting a common enemy at the time, OJ isn't.
I don't know your OJ but it takes guts to serve in the IDF and no sane
person would do it for either money or a passport or anything but
conviction. I met a father in Israel who's eldest son was about to be
inducted into the army. The man's face was gray with concern and with good
reason. The weak in spirit are going the other way. -the Troll
hippo
2005-01-16 18:12:08 UTC
Permalink
<wrote in message
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
Cook calls me OJ . the Name is R.J.,,,, he must think it is a Dig on me
since OJ killed a Goldman and is now living in Florida, Cook thinks he can
rankle me. but hell I've seen far worse then this idiot cook can bring on !
It seems you guys have set up a pretty bitter personal feud. That's your
business but this sort of thing is unfortunate and unproductive for Usenet
which is best used for the dispassionate exchange of ideas (although all of
us slip now and again). -the Troll

Posted from AHB.
Michael W Cook
2005-01-16 23:04:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
Cook calls me OJ . the Name is R.J.,,,, he must think it is a Dig on me
since OJ killed a Goldman and is now living in Florida, Cook thinks he can
rankle me. but hell I've seen far worse then this idiot cook can bring on
"Cook thinks he can rankle me" ?

Hilarious.

I don't think, I know, it's like taking candy from a kid.

The problem is, you are so stupid it's a no-contest each and every time.
I only have to blink and you swallow the bait and fall into line, because
you're an arsehole, Goldman, and always will be.

MWC
Ginny Wagner
2005-01-15 20:31:10 UTC
Permalink
My uncle was killed 23/8/43, 20 years old, a pilot in WWII, attached to the
Royal Canadian Air Corps and later to the U.S. Marine Corps. He was from
Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Knowing my family, he certainly wasn't a mercenary.

Ginny

Subject: Re: British Royals -- Uniquely Blunder-Prone?



"Michael W Cook" wrote in message
Post by Michael W Cook
mer·ce·nar·y ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mûrs-nr)
adj.
1.. Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain.
2.. Hired for service in a foreign army.
That's you alright - Born in America, yet you fight for Israel, a foreign
power and NOT the country of your birth.
n. pl. mer·ce·nar·ies
1.. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
2.. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.
You again, Israel was NOT the country of your birth.
So what. No one would choose to fight in the IDF for money. The US army pays
much better, is better set up and comfortable, and not nearly as risky. Many
Jews in the US have dual US-Israeli citizenship. The US pilots who fought in
the RAF and RCAF in WWII, and the Lafayette Escadrille in the first war,
certainly were not in it for money. -the Troll
r***@bellsouth.net
2005-01-15 17:33:45 UTC
Permalink
sorry ass clown I'm a citizen of Israel///
you lose again
piss off bog boy
Post by Michael W Cook
mer·ce·nar·y ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mûrs-nr)
adj.
1.. Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain.
2.. Hired for service in a foreign army.
That's you alright - Born in America, yet you fight for Israel, a foreign
power and NOT the country of your birth.
n. pl. mer·ce·nar·ies
1.. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
2.. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.
You again, Israel was NOT the country of your birth.
You're a hireling alright - You're nothing but Canon-Fodder.
Expendable.
No use to man or beast.
A Loser.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Middle English mercenarie, a mercenary, from Old French mercenaire,
from Latin mercnnrius, from mercs, wages, price.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
merce·nari·ly adv.
merce·nari·ness n.
[Download or Buy Now]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language,
Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
mercenary
adj 1: marked by materialism [syn: materialistic, worldly-minded] 2: used of
soldiers hired by a foreign army [syn: mercenary(a), freelance(a)] 3: profit
oriented; "a commercial book"; "preached a mercantile and militant
patriotism"- John Buchan; "a mercenary enterprise"; "a moneymaking business"
[syn: mercantile, moneymaking(a)] n : a person hired to fight for another
country than their own [syn: soldier of fortune]
You again, quite why you deny it is beyond me.
MWC
Michael W Cook
2005-01-15 18:50:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
sorry ass clown I'm a citizen of Israel///
you lose again
piss off bog boy
You were an American Citizen, then you became an Israeli citizen after doing
your mercenary service with the IDF.

OJ took the Zionist Shilling......TRAITOR.
r***@bellsouth.net
2005-01-15 19:41:14 UTC
Permalink
looks like you can't read a definition at all you moronic old poofter!
Post by Michael W Cook
Post by r***@bellsouth.net
sorry ass clown I'm a citizen of Israel///
you lose again
piss off bog boy
You were an American Citizen, then you became an Israeli citizen after doing
your mercenary service with the IDF.
OJ took the Zionist Shilling......TRAITOR.
Michael W Cook
2005-01-15 11:28:56 UTC
Permalink
trai·tor ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trtr)
n.
One who betrays one's country, a cause, or a trust, especially one
who commits treason,
You again, OJ.

You served in the US military and now you serve for the Israeli military,
and you've no doubt passed on classified information to the Zionists.

You're a Traitor, no two ways about it.

Now go away and look up WANKER, because you are one of those as well.

MWC
r***@bellsouth.net
2005-01-15 17:35:14 UTC
Permalink
what's classified about riding in a chopper shooting things?
and anyway I have principals,,,,, something you know little of
so back to your mothers basement you miscreant
Post by Michael W Cook
trai·tor ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trtr)
n.
One who betrays one's country, a cause, or a trust, especially one
who commits treason,
You again, OJ.
You served in the US military and now you serve for the Israeli military,
and you've no doubt passed on classified information to the Zionists.
You're a Traitor, no two ways about it.
Now go away and look up WANKER, because you are one of those as well.
MWC
John Cartmell
2005-01-15 01:28:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael W Cook
Harry's actions in wearing a Nazi Uniform as Fancy Dress to a private
party can only be described as inappropriate and insensitive for someone
of his position in society.
Nothing more.
It should make people question his judgement. As a twenty year old that's
OK; he's not yet mature. It makes me question a decision to put him on a
high-flyers officer course where he will be amongst the very youngest and
'matched' with more mature graduates. I wouldn't trust him to make the
decisions an Army officer needs to make and, if he's not to do the job for
real, I want to ask what the hell the Royal Family and the Army are playing
at.
--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527
Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com
Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines
Vaughan Sanders
2005-01-15 11:38:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Cartmell
Post by Michael W Cook
Harry's actions in wearing a Nazi Uniform as Fancy Dress to a private
party can only be described as inappropriate and insensitive for someone
of his position in society.
Nothing more.
It should make people question his judgement. As a twenty year old that's
OK; he's not yet mature. It makes me question a decision to put him on a
high-flyers officer course where he will be amongst the very youngest and
'matched' with more mature graduates. I wouldn't trust him to make the
decisions an Army officer needs to make and, if he's not to do the job for
real, I want to ask what the hell the Royal Family and the Army are playing
at.
--
My father was at Sandhurst at that age, fought Hitler and was dead at 27
when about to be promoted to Major.
The costume was a joke, it's the sanity of the people who attack him
over this I would question.

Jamie
fairthorne
2005-01-15 15:19:44 UTC
Permalink
Could we please have an end to this discussion

I had hoped to be able to read this conference as an escape from the media
saturation of this non-event

cheers

Simon
Peter Stewart
2005-01-15 03:40:35 UTC
Permalink
"Michael W Cook" <***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:BE0E1200.A763%***@hotmail.com...

<snip>
Post by Michael W Cook
Anyone would think that it was only Jews who died in WWII, none of the other
millions of victims get a mention these days and everyone has to tread on
egg-shells for fear of offending them.
It wasn't the Gays, Gypsies, Poles, Czechs, Scandinavians or Russians that
Harry offended, or the people of London who had their city bombed to rubble
around them by the Nazis, oh no, it was the Jews, only the Jews he offended.
Of course the media plays along by falling over themselves to get a quote
from a professional 'Jew', who will inevitably tell us how offended ALL Jews
will be and then bang on about Auschwitz for a few minutes.
Job done.
Jewish/Zionist groups have turned the Holocaust into an industry, and their
relatives who died under the Nazis would turn in their graves if they could
see how their memory is used and abused by these groups today.
This statement is too vile to pass uncontested in SGM.

Cook ïmplies that a "professional 'Jew'" has no right to speak for others
who are living, while at the same time he assumes for himself the right, and
insight, to prognosticate on behalf of Jews who died in the Holocaust. This
is disgraceful, and inadmissable.

The crimes done in the death camps are the greatest organised evil that
mankind has enacted and suffered. Of course this must be remembered, on an
"ïndustrial" scale if you like, by everyone. Jewish witness to the Shoa
doesn't get in the way of any other group or nation making similar
observances.

Peter Stewart
Barrie J. Wright
2005-01-16 01:27:00 UTC
Permalink
Thank you Peter for nailing this sort of anti-Jewish nonsense.
No-one minds if Gays, Gypsies, Poles, Czechs, Scandinavians
or Russians also speak up for themselves on this topic, but if JEWS do.....

The Jews and Israel have every right not only to a 'Holocaust
Industry', but to defend the only state their people have in the world.

To imply otherwise is both pernicious and very sinister, especially given
the rise of radical Islamism.

Recently the BBC no less [not a known promoter of Israel] found
by survey that 60% of under 35 aged Britons [UK people] do not
even know what 'Auschwitz' means!
Very Scary - as they have probably also tuned out Pol Pot, Ruanda,
Bosnia, Darfur etc..

Prince Charles and anyone else should know better than to imply
that it's OK or acceptable for Harry to ignore it too.
Says a lot about UK history teaching, or its failure.

I speak as a subject, and still a supporter, of the Queen.

Barrie Wright

Adelaide
South Australia


----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Stewart" <***@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 2:10 PM
Subject: Speaking for victims of Nazism [was: Re: British Royals -- Uniquely
Blunder-Prone?]
Post by Peter Stewart
<snip>
Post by Michael W Cook
Anyone would think that it was only Jews who died in WWII, none of the other
millions of victims get a mention these days and everyone has to tread on
egg-shells for fear of offending them.
It wasn't the Gays, Gypsies, Poles, Czechs, Scandinavians or Russians that
Harry offended, or the people of London who had their city bombed to rubble
around them by the Nazis, oh no, it was the Jews, only the Jews he offended.
Of course the media plays along by falling over themselves to get a quote
from a professional 'Jew', who will inevitably tell us how offended ALL Jews
will be and then bang on about Auschwitz for a few minutes.
Job done.
Jewish/Zionist groups have turned the Holocaust into an industry, and their
relatives who died under the Nazis would turn in their graves if they could
see how their memory is used and abused by these groups today.
This statement is too vile to pass uncontested in SGM.
Cook ïmplies that a "professional 'Jew'" has no right to speak for others
who are living, while at the same time he assumes for himself the right, and
insight, to prognosticate on behalf of Jews who died in the Holocaust. This
is disgraceful, and inadmissable.
The crimes done in the death camps are the greatest organised evil that
mankind has enacted and suffered. Of course this must be remembered, on an
"ïndustrial" scale if you like, by everyone. Jewish witness to the Shoa
doesn't get in the way of any other group or nation making similar
observances.
Peter Stewart
______________________________
Peter Stewart
2005-01-16 03:14:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Barrie J. Wright
Thank you Peter for nailing this sort of anti-Jewish nonsense.
No-one minds if Gays, Gypsies, Poles, Czechs, Scandinavians
or Russians also speak up for themselves on this topic, but if JEWS do.....
It is of course deeply absurd as well as uncouth for Cook to claim that
victims of Nazism might be spinning in their graves, when the vast majority
of these people were robbed even of the little dignity afforded by a grave.

Peter Stewart
D. Spencer Hines
2005-01-16 03:33:09 UTC
Permalink
Precisely!

Indeed deeply absurd, uncouth, blinkered, insensitive and pig-ignorant.

DSH

"Peter Stewart" <***@msn.com> wrote in message news:6_kGd.120266$***@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

| ""Barrie J. Wright"" <***@esc.net.au> wrote in message
| news:010c01c4fb6a$ff0158c0$***@barriewr...

| > Thank you Peter for nailing this sort of anti-Jewish nonsense.
| > No-one minds if Gays, Gypsies, Poles, Czechs, Scandinavians
| > or Russians also speak up for themselves on this topic, but if JEWS
| > do.....
|
| It is of course deeply absurd as well as uncouth for Cook to claim
| that victims of Nazism might be spinning in their graves, when the
| vast majority of these people were robbed even of the little
| dignity afforded by a grave.
|
| Peter Stewart
Betty Owen
2005-01-16 03:56:28 UTC
Permalink
Sadly,
I do not think homing in on one person's casual ignorance of the facts and
circumstance of WWII... is serving any pupose.
I speak from a thirst of historical knowledge
I am reminded is Steven Speliberg's (sp) incident after he made Shindler's
list. He was talking in front of a group of high school students and they
were laughing and making fun of the seriousness of WWII and the holocaust.
I think that is what started the holocoust libraries that sprun around the
nation.
It shocked SS so bad he and others started the librares.

Perhaps we do not deliver history as we should in schools I think history
is a subject that grows distant in the schools daily. This loop is
important to me not just because of the genealogy but also the side benefit
of history.

We learn history so hopefully we will not repeat our mistakes. The crime
is forgetting our history or not teaching it or altering it. That is what
dooms us I think.
The prince might be rebellious and young but he also perhaps did not
recieve the right emphasis of his history lessons. No doubt his grandmother
will remind him as she lived it. But we have a great many American Youth
that are just as uninformed.

Each one of us that learns, retains any part of history is a step toward the
wisdom of protecting or future.
My apologies for off subject...

Now on with more of the medieval stuff I so love

Betty
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005
l***@yahoo.com
2005-01-16 07:43:38 UTC
Permalink
Excellent point. Does anyone actually know what Harry believes about
the Holocaust? Does anyone know what his actual opinions are - of if he
even has opinions? I don't know about English aristocracy and royalty,
but in my neighborhood the kids think it is very cool to seem hard and
merciless. Fortunately, this is a ruse for most of them and fades as
they mature. It is very difficult to feel the reality of the kind of
suffering endured by millions of people or, indeed, tens of thousands
in the wake of a natural disaster. The trick is to see them one family
or one person at a time. This is an opportunity for a young prince to
put faces on the people who died in the Holocaust and on the faces of
the people who survived it.
Betty Owen
2005-01-16 15:27:25 UTC
Permalink
I would venture Lostcooper that if you check your local schools you will be
shocked at how much and how little they teach about history and how it is
altered.. or omitted
I was fortunate to read some fiction novels about the holocaust which led me
to read a lot of historical materical on my own when I was 16... I learned
of the horrors of that period.... but my educations did not seek to hid the
truth or hid the violence of the period... The childern growing up today
seem far removed from understand the wars of the 20th century...... Just my
humble oponion.

even the wars from the crusades seem to be over looked now.... btw for there
is a moving coming out the Kingdom of Heaven which is about the Crusade...
it looks good I hope it lives up to what I have seen....
Since medieval is all of our love.


Betty


----- Original Message -----
From: <***@yahoo.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 1:43 AM
Subject: Re: the history lesson ----- a little off the subject
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Excellent point. Does anyone actually know what Harry believes about
the Holocaust? Does anyone know what his actual opinions are - of if he
even has opinions? I don't know about English aristocracy and royalty,
but in my neighborhood the kids think it is very cool to seem hard and
merciless. Fortunately, this is a ruse for most of them and fades as
they mature. It is very difficult to feel the reality of the kind of
suffering endured by millions of people or, indeed, tens of thousands
in the wake of a natural disaster. The trick is to see them one family
or one person at a time. This is an opportunity for a young prince to
put faces on the people who died in the Holocaust and on the faces of
the people who survived it.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005
John Steele Gordon
2005-01-16 17:12:29 UTC
Permalink
Since I'm an historian by trade, let me weigh in here, very briefly.

I can only speak for American schools, but the problem there is two-fold.

1) Teachers Unions

They dominate American public schools almost totally, being in all fifty
states the most powerful lobby in the state capital and usually dominating
local school boards as well. (Teachers in District A can't sit on the board
of District A, but they can sit on the board of District B, where they
actually live, and vice versa, so school boards usually have a majority of
professional educators, many retired, sitting on them.) Thus education
policy is entirely directed in ways that benefit teachers: small classes, no
merit pay, no tests that would allow one school to be compared with another,
minimal homework, etc. etc. etc. It is much easier to "teach" such feel-good
things as self-esteem than the nuts and bolts of rigorous subjects. So
history becomes "social studies" whatever the hell that might be. Boring
things like dates are minimized. The result is universal ignorance among the
students of the basic facts of history. Only about half of American students
can name what century the Civil War took place in.

2) Political Correctness

History, unlike mathematics and physics, intersects with politics, at least
fairly recent history. No one, I suppose, has an emotional link to the
struggle between patricians and plebeians in ancient Rome, but the history
of American Civil War, or Ireland, or the Holocaust, or the Cold War, are
other matters altogether. The essence of political correctness is that
designated ethnic and religious groups (and feminists) have an infinite
right to be offended. They or. far more often, their self-appointed
"leaders" have merely to say they are offended and the cause of their
displeasure must be instantly cleansed from the curriculum. So anything that
might be even mildly controversial is simply left out, and a lot of
feel-good stuff is put in. And, of course, anything that would reflect well
on America must be carefully avoided. So the writing of the Constitution is
not presented as a remarkable triumph that allowed this vast and diverse
country to have stable and ever-increasingly democratic government, but
instead is presented as a document that tolerated the evil of slavery.

The result is mush badly taught. Is it any surprise that so few students
subjected to this learn much history?

JSG
Post by Betty Owen
I would venture Lostcooper that if you check your local schools you will be
shocked at how much and how little they teach about history and how it is
altered.. or omitted
I was fortunate to read some fiction novels about the holocaust which led
me to read a lot of historical materical on my own when I was 16... I
learned of the horrors of that period.... but my educations did not seek
to hid the truth or hid the violence of the period... The childern
growing up today seem far removed from understand the wars of the 20th
century...... Just my humble oponion.
even the wars from the crusades seem to be over looked now.... btw for
there is a moving coming out the Kingdom of Heaven which is about the
Crusade... it looks good I hope it lives up to what I have seen....
Since medieval is all of our love.
D. Spencer Hines
2005-01-16 17:36:33 UTC
Permalink
Bingo!

The American Educational Establishment needs a thorough housecleaning.

Competition across the system, coupled with high standards and
substantive content in the teaching of History and other subjects is
necessary and required. Vouchers, Si!

Yes, Virginia, that DOES mean learning more dates, names and historical
facts about unique events -- and a fading away of the emphasis on
feel-good, insipid, wishy-washy, content-free, loosey-goosey "social
studies."

To do ANY of those things we need to put paid to the Faux "Liberal"
Monopoly in American Public Education.

Most public school teachers are working from a flaccid, knackered and
discredited Ideology -- that can only accelerate the downward spiral.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor

"John Steele Gordon" <***@optonline.net> wrote in message news:pmxGd.7047$Q%***@fe10.lga...

| Since I'm an historian by trade, let me weigh in here, very briefly.
|
| I can only speak for American schools, but the problem there is
two-fold.
|
| 1) Teachers Unions
|
| They dominate American public schools almost totally, being in all
fifty
| states the most powerful lobby in the state capital and usually
dominating
| local school boards as well. (Teachers in District A can't sit on the
board
| of District A, but they can sit on the board of District B, where they
| actually live, and vice versa, so school boards usually have a
majority of
| professional educators, many retired, sitting on them.) Thus education
| policy is entirely directed in ways that benefit teachers: small
classes, no
| merit pay, no tests that would allow one school to be compared with
another,
| minimal homework, etc. etc. etc. It is much easier to "teach" such
feel-good
| things as self-esteem than the nuts and bolts of rigorous subjects.
So
| history becomes "social studies" whatever the hell that might be.
Boring
| things like dates are minimized. The result is universal ignorance
among the
| students of the basic facts of history. Only about half of American
students
| can name what century the Civil War took place in.
|
| 2) Political Correctness
|
| History, unlike mathematics and physics, intersects with politics, at
least
| fairly recent history. No one, I suppose, has an emotional link to the
| struggle between patricians and plebeians in ancient Rome, but the
history
| of American Civil War, or Ireland, or the Holocaust, or the Cold War,
are
| other matters altogether. The essence of political correctness is that
| designated ethnic and religious groups (and feminists) have an
infinite
| right to be offended. They or. far more often, their self-appointed
| "leaders" have merely to say they are offended and the cause of their
| displeasure must be instantly cleansed from the curriculum. So
anything that
| might be even mildly controversial is simply left out, and a lot of
| feel-good stuff is put in. And, of course, anything that would reflect
well
| on America must be carefully avoided. So the writing of the
Constitution is
| not presented as a remarkable triumph that allowed this vast and
diverse
| country to have stable and ever-increasingly democratic government,
but
| instead is presented as a document that tolerated the evil of slavery.
|
| The result is mush badly taught. Is it any surprise that so few
students
| subjected to this learn much history?
|
| JSG
|
| ""Betty Owen"" <***@wt.net> wrote in message
| news:003c01c4fbdf$b64ee8c0$***@owens...
| >I would venture Lostcooper that if you check your local schools you
will be
| >shocked at how much and how little they teach about history and how
it is
| >altered.. or omitted
| > I was fortunate to read some fiction novels about the holocaust
which led
| > me to read a lot of historical materical on my own when I was 16...
I
| > learned of the horrors of that period.... but my educations did not
seek
| > to hid the truth or hid the violence of the period... The childern
| > growing up today seem far removed from understand the wars of the
20th
| > century...... Just my humble oponion.
| >
| > even the wars from the crusades seem to be over looked now.... btw
for
| > there is a moving coming out the Kingdom of Heaven which is about
the
| > Crusade... it looks good I hope it lives up to what I have
seen....
| > Since medieval is all of our love.
l***@yahoo.com
2005-01-17 06:03:11 UTC
Permalink
Wrong on both counts. Your opinion is only right-wing propaganda.
School boards are made up mainly of local business people, not
teachers. I wish there were teachers on them! As for political
correctness, that's right wing *code* for "let's stomp on dissent and
teach the kids to be as stupid as our current president". One of the
targets of the right-wingers is "critical thinking" - i.e.,
scholarship. Teaching at the college level 0in a conservative area for
more than 20 years, it was common to get students who had graduated
from high school without ever having been asked to complete a term
paper. They were required to do them for me and I spent many hours in
my office giving them one-on-one tutoring in such skills. In this way I
was able to help some students with a 4th grade education and
determination to develop the skills to finish two-year college and go
on. I am proud to have played a positive role in their lives that has
enabled them to face the future able to make choices. I taught some of
the classes that the right-wingers hate, by the way: ethnic studies,
American studies, etc. There was nothing fluffy about my classes and I
am only one among thousands. Don't look at classes like mine for the
source of today's educational problems: look at poverty, television,
processed chemical foods, etc. Bronwen
l***@yahoo.com
2005-01-17 05:52:54 UTC
Permalink
I wouldn't be surprised at all, having recently retired from 25 years
of teaching at the college level. I got the kids when they were 18 or
older and the damage had been done. Not only are they ignorant of the
most basic history of any time period, but they don't believe it when
they hear about it in the classroom - after all, if someone hadn't
already told them about it, it couldn't have actually happened. I agree
completely with what you said. Bronwen
Deborah Sharavi
2005-01-15 00:39:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
"Close friends of Prince Harry fear he is "out of control". They say he
is surrounded by a group of "hooray idiots" who are encouraging his
increasingly reckless behaviour.
Oh, crap. He's 19.
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Their concern comes as Prince Charles today refused to make Harry
apologise in public for wearing a Nazi swastika and German uniform at a
fancy-dress party. The Prince of Wales says he will not force Harry to
visit Auschwitz or to say sorry on TV. Charles feels his son is being
pilloried for a silly prank.
I wouldn't make the kid apologize either. Nothing to apologize for.
Post by D. Spencer Hines
PRINCE CHARLES IS IN DENIAL. ---- DSH
Not about the kid's costume, though.
Post by D. Spencer Hines
But in an unprecedented intervention, one of Harry's closest friends
says it was only the latest in a long line of ill-advised stunts, most
"Those of us who know him best are worried that he is behaving like an
idiot.
I think the same thing about my teenaged son at least five times a
week.
Post by D. Spencer Hines
In the US, the New York Post ran the picture of Harry with the
headline
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Royal Nazi while the Washington Post declared: "Consensus on Prince
Harry's Gaffe: He Knows Nothing."
That's not what they said when he visited AIDs victims in Africa. Leave
the kid alone.

Deborah
D. Spencer Hines
2005-01-14 20:09:48 UTC
Permalink
"Coming soon ... film showing 'gentle' Hitler"

14 January 2005

"A taboo-breaking German film that portrays Hitler as a gentle, kindly
character is to be released in cinemas across Britain.

_The Downfall_ divided German opinion and broke box office records when
it opened there last year. Now the £9 million film is to be shown
here, at the beginning of April.

It follows Hitler during his last days, holed up in his Berlin bunker as
the Russians advanced on the city, and culminates with his suicide
alongside Eva Braun on 30 April, 1945.

This is the first German film in which the Nazi leader, played by Bruno
Ganz, is the central character.

But rather than a bellowing, mass-murdering maniac, it portrays a human,
sometimes gentle Hitler.

Director Oliver Hirschbiegel said: "We are trying to give Hitler a
three-dimensional portrait because we know from all accounts that Hitler
was a very charming man - a man who managed to seduce a whole people
into barbarism."
-------------------

Hmmmmmmmm...

Will this be the "Prince Harry Defence."?

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor
William Black
2005-01-15 13:31:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
"Coming soon ... film showing 'gentle' Hitler"
14 January 2005
"A taboo-breaking German film that portrays Hitler as a gentle, kindly
character is to be released in cinemas across Britain.
Very late news.

A film 'called 'Uncle Adolf' was shown on TV here last week and covered much
the same ground.
--
William Black

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe
Barbeques on fire by chalets past the headland
I've watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off Newborough
All this will pass like ice-cream on the beach
Time for tea
Tony Hoskins
2005-01-14 20:10:06 UTC
Permalink
Polemics elsewhere, please!
Ginny Wagner
2005-01-14 20:13:56 UTC
Permalink
We should take his behavior as a 'tell' of how the elite in Europe really
feel about the Jew. It seems to me that the problem is not that he is so
'stupid' as to reveal to the world what is really happening behind the
scenes, but that a person who truly found the yellow stars of the 13c
followed by the same yellow star of the 20c repugnant, wouldn't need to
'behave' well, and has revealed what the truth of what the Jews have been
saying about Europe and the elite who lead the masses by thoughts and deeds.

If that boy were truly not prejudiced, his heart would have never let him
dress in such a manner.

And that, I'm sure, would be the message from a mother who held AIDS victims
in her arms. She would be horrorified at his ability to don the outfit -- a
woman who provided legs to amputees and who didn't worry about whether the
man she loved was 'acceptable' in western high society, wouldn't laugh off,
or excuse, an act that revealed such a lack of human decency and callous
disregard. That boy needed to be publicly humiliated and he needs a lesson
in human dignity.

When I was 9 I met a survivor, the 'grandmother' of a friend, who told me
what she endured. Nothing like seeing a tatooed number on a person's arm,
having them tell you about drinking their own urine and having spoons stuck
up the arse when they wouldn't defecate on command (of course, she hadn't
been fed or given water in weeks so had nothing to pass). She was just 60
and looked 100.

Too young to take it all in, I blocked a lot of what she told me, but my
heart has retained the knowledge of man's ability to abuse his fellow man,
all these years. That was back in the mid 1950s. And, she told me the
reason she told her story to any who would listen, was so that it would
never happen again. She was happy to relive the horror, despite her tears
when telling, to be sure that the story didn't die with her. And so, on
this occassion, I tell it to you.

Ginny Wagner

"God does not comfort us to make us comfortable, but to make us
omforers. -- Dr. Jowett, Streams in the Desert


-----Original Message-----
From: D. Spencer Hines [mailto:***@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 1:15 PM
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-***@rootsweb.com
Subject: British Royals -- Uniquely Blunder-Prone?


Are British Royals uniquely blunder-prone and abnormally stupid [some of
them] or is it just the far more aggressive British Press that creates
these hilarious British Royal Blunders, SNAFU's and Embarrassments -- a
combination of the two?

Other Nations' Royals do not seem to be as pig-ignorantly foolish and
fanatically self-destructive as the British Royals.

Fergie The Slut, Duchess of York -- surely one of the most abysmally
air-headed of them all. See Below.

You Brits might just want to replace this bad lot -- bring back the
Stuarts?

The current heir seems to be a chap in Liechtenstein

Consider -- this Hanover lot has run into the sands and petered out on
you.

Josef Wenzel v.u. zu Liechtenstein -- take a look at him, Brits -- you
could do MUCH worse with this Hanover lot you've inherited and probably
WILL. JOSEPH I, the Jacobites call him. Joseph is reported to be an
11th great-grandson of Charles I.

He's only NINE years old -- TRAINABLE.

Hell, he also probably speaks better English than your GEORGE I ever
did.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor
-------------------------

'Diana would be proud'
By Stephen Deal, Metro
14 January 2005

"The Duchess of York leapt to the defence of Prince Harry over his Nazi
costume blunder yesterday, saying: 'His mother would be proud of him.'

Hilarious! Fergie The Airheaded prolongs the agony for the Queen,
Prince Philip and Prince Charles -- keeping the story alive. ---- DSH

The prince's aunt said he 'deserved a break' and added: 'I am behind him
100 per cent. OK, he wore a fancy dress costume, he got it wrong. I
hope the world accepts his apology.' ******

"I am behind him 100 per cent." ?????

This woman is as DUMB as they come. ---- DSH

A photo on the front page of yesterday's Sun newspaper showed the
20-year-old Royal enjoying a drink and a cigarette while dressed as a
member of Rommel's Afrika Corps, complete with red swastika armband.

In a statement, Harry said: 'I am very sorry if I caused any offence or
embarrassment to anyone. It was a poor choice of costume and I
apologise.'

"IF I caused any offence or embarrassment to anyone..." !!!!! -- What An
Idiot Prince Harry Is -- still digging a DEEPER HOLE for himself. ----
DSH

The Ministry of Defence insisted the incident would not affect Harry's
place at Sandhurst military academy, which he is expected to take up in
May.

IT WOULD affect the CANDIDACY of any OTHER applicant to SANDHURST. NOW,
the Royal Family has THAT issue, the issue of blatant, Royal FAVORITISM
to deal with. ---- DSH

The Duchess said she sympathised with the prince because she had made
similar errors of judgment in the past.

She told a US TV channel: 'I know what it is like to have bad press - I
had it for quite a long time.

'But Harry is a great boy, he really is. He is first rate. He does so
much to help so many children all over the world.' However, her comments
appeared to do little to calm the controversy.

HILARIOUS! No kidding. She is pouring PETROL on the FIRE! ---- DSH

The Simon Wiesenthal Centre, one of the largest international Jewish
human rights organisations, said the prince should attend a ceremony at
Auschwitz later this month to mark the 60th anniversary of the death
camp's liberation by allied troops. In a strongly worded rebuke, the
US-based centre added: 'This was a shameful act, displaying
insensitivity for the victims, not just for those soldiers of his own
country who gave their lives to defeat Nazism but to the Holocaust
victims.'

CORRECT! ---- DSH

Israeli foreign minister Silvan Shalom described Harry's use of Nazi
symbols as intolerable. 'This can encourage others to think that
perhaps that period was not as bad as we teach the young generation,' he
said.

RIGHT! The teaching of Modern European History in Britain must be in
the toilet. ---- DSH

Prince Charles was reported to have privately berated Harry but told an
aide his son did not need to grovel and apologise further. Charles was
also said to feel Prince William should have stopped his brother from
wearing the costume."
--------------------

WRONG! Prince Harry DOES need to GROVEL FURTHER -- ASAP. He hasn't
even BEGUN to grovel properly.

OF COURSE Prince William should have STOPPED HIM. He's an idiot too.

More fun and games with the British Royals. They exist primarily to
entertain the World.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor
Peter A. Kincaid
2005-01-14 21:15:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ginny Wagner
When I was 9 I met a survivor, the 'grandmother' of a friend, who told me
what she endured. Nothing like seeing a tatooed number on a person's arm,
having them tell you about drinking their own urine and having spoons stuck
up the arse when they wouldn't defecate on command (of course, she hadn't
been fed or given water in weeks so had nothing to pass). She was just 60
and looked 100.
Too young to take it all in, I blocked a lot of what she told me, but my
heart has retained the knowledge of man's ability to abuse his fellow man,
all these years. That was back in the mid 1950s. And, she told me the
reason she told her story to any who would listen, was so that it would
never happen again. She was happy to relive the horror, despite her tears
when telling, to be sure that the story didn't die with her. And so, on
this occassion, I tell it to you.
Unfortunately all the story telling has done very little. Rwanda and
the prison abuse in Iraq at Abu Ghraib testify to this. Sudan is likely
another story in the making. As long as there is little accountability all
this will continue as history proves.

Best wishes!

Peter
l***@yahoo.com
2005-01-17 06:09:21 UTC
Permalink
In today's newspaper Bush asserted that his questionable (my word, not
his) re-election was "all the accountability we need" regarding his
policies in the Middle East. Therefore, no need for investigatory
operations on anything. I'm thoroughly convinced now that the US has
been taken in a coup and is now a dictatorship. Bronwen
Roger LeBlanc
2005-01-15 09:49:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ginny Wagner
Too young to take it all in, I blocked a lot of what she told me, but my
heart has retained the knowledge of man's ability to abuse his fellow man,
all these years. That was back in the mid 1950s. And, she told me the
reason she told her story to any who would listen, was so that it would
never happen again. She was happy to relive the horror, despite her tears
when telling, to be sure that the story didn't die with her. And so, on
this occassion, I tell it to you.
Ginny Wagner
This would not have such a hollow ring to it, if when we learned of the
torture-probably the tip of the iceberg- in Iraq, the Jews had recalled
such anecdotes and been at the head of the line in protest. Of all
people to have shown outrage, who better?
"As long as it's not us" would seem to be the real lesson here.

Roger LeBlanc
G***@aol.com
2005-01-14 21:06:10 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/14/2005 2:17:28 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
***@hotmail.com writes:

You Brits might just want to replace this bad lot -- bring back the
Stuarts?

You surely cannot be serious with this statement. The Stuarts were the
worst rulers that any nation could have.

One of them rode off a cliff trying to get back to his new bride during a
storm and left the nation of Scotland in a mess, with no real successor to that
throne.

Charles II was a womanizer and whoremonger of the cheapest sort, and his
governance reflected that.

James II, was a prig, and cared not for what the majority of the people
wanted, he was going to be a Catholic, if it hairlipped every cat in the alley.

The last of the line to make any real attempt the gain the throne again was
good old Bonny Prince Charley. What did he do. Landed against all the
advice of his advisors, failed to accept the advice of his military people, handed
the English a battle at Culloden by holding his highlanders on a hill while
the English cannon made mince meat of them. They finally charged without
orders and were consequently slaughtered.

Yeah, that's just what Britain needs today, some worse rulers than the
German bunch who presently sit on the throne.

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas
Gordon Banks
2005-01-14 21:55:03 UTC
Permalink
I knew that King Alexander rode off a cliff, but didn't know one of the
Stuarts had. Which Stuart was it?
Post by G***@aol.com
In a message dated 1/14/2005 2:17:28 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
You Brits might just want to replace this bad lot -- bring back the
Stuarts?
You surely cannot be serious with this statement. The Stuarts were the
worst rulers that any nation could have.
One of them rode off a cliff trying to get back to his new bride during a
storm and left the nation of Scotland in a mess, with no real successor to that
throne.
Charles II was a womanizer and whoremonger of the cheapest sort, and his
governance reflected that.
James II, was a prig, and cared not for what the majority of the people
wanted, he was going to be a Catholic, if it hairlipped every cat in the alley.
The last of the line to make any real attempt the gain the throne again was
good old Bonny Prince Charley. What did he do. Landed against all the
advice of his advisors, failed to accept the advice of his military people, handed
the English a battle at Culloden by holding his highlanders on a hill while
the English cannon made mince meat of them. They finally charged without
orders and were consequently slaughtered.
Yeah, that's just what Britain needs today, some worse rulers than the
German bunch who presently sit on the throne.
Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas
D. Spencer Hines
2005-01-14 22:12:45 UTC
Permalink
Bingo!

Alexander III of Scotland was no Stuart.

Hale has shot himself in the foot again.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor

"Gordon Banks" <***@gordonbanks.com> wrote in message news:***@teranews...

| I knew that King Alexander rode off a cliff, but didn't know one of
| the Stuarts had. Which Stuart was it?
|
| On Fri, 2005-01-14 at 21:06 +0000, ***@aol.com wrote:
| > In a message dated 1/14/2005 2:17:28 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
| > ***@hotmail.com writes:
| >
| > You Brits might just want to replace this bad lot -- bring back
| > the Stuarts?
| >
| > You surely cannot be serious with this statement. The Stuarts were
the
| > worst rulers that any nation could have.
| >
| > One of them rode off a cliff trying to get back to his new bride
during a
| > storm and left the nation of Scotland in a mess, with no real
successor to that
| > throne.
| >
| > Charles II was a womanizer and whoremonger of the cheapest sort, and
his
| > governance reflected that.
| >
| > James II, was a prig, and cared not for what the majority of the
people
| > wanted, he was going to be a Catholic, if it hairlipped every cat
in the alley.
| >
| > The last of the line to make any real attempt the gain the throne
again was
| > good old Bonny Prince Charley. What did he do. Landed against all
the
| > advice of his advisors, failed to accept the advice of his military
people, handed
| > the English a battle at Culloden by holding his highlanders on a
hill while
| > the English cannon made mince meat of them. They finally charged
without
| > orders and were consequently slaughtered.
| >
| > Yeah, that's just what Britain needs today, some worse rulers than
the
| > German bunch who presently sit on the throne.
| >
| > Gordon Hale
| > Grand Prairie, Texas
Brant Gibbard
2005-01-15 03:42:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by G***@aol.com
One of them rode off a cliff trying to get back to his new bride during a
storm and left the nation of Scotland in a mess, with no real successor to that
throne.
Alexander III was not a Stuart (two whole dynasties before the Stuarts
in fact)
Brant Gibbard
Toronto, ON


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Peter Stewart
2005-01-15 03:52:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brant Gibbard
Post by G***@aol.com
One of them rode off a cliff trying to get back to his new bride during a
storm and left the nation of Scotland in a mess, with no real successor to that
throne.
Alexander III was not a Stuart (two whole dynasties before the Stuarts
in fact)
I'm not sure how you are computing "dynasties", but this could be
misleading - after Alexander the Glorious there were representatives of
three different houses on the throne of Scotland before the Stewarts
inherited it: these were Norway (Margaret the Maid), Balliol and Bruce.

Peter Stewart
Brant Gibbard
2005-01-15 04:15:18 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 03:52:44 GMT, "Peter Stewart"
Post by Peter Stewart
I'm not sure how you are computing "dynasties", but this could be
misleading - after Alexander the Glorious there were representatives of
three different houses on the throne of Scotland before the Stewarts
inherited it: these were Norway (Margaret the Maid), Balliol and Bruce.
You're quite right, I missed those.


Brant Gibbard
Toronto, ON


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Julian Richards
2005-01-14 21:21:04 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:14:46 -0000, "D. Spencer Hines"
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Are British Royals uniquely blunder-prone and abnormally stupid [some of
them] or is it just the far more aggressive British Press that creates
these hilarious British Royal Blunders, SNAFU's and Embarrassments -- a
combination of the two?
Other Nations' Royals do not seem to be as pig-ignorantly foolish and
fanatically self-destructive as the British Royals.
Fergie The Slut, Duchess of York -- surely one of the most abysmally
air-headed of them all. See Below.
You Brits might just want to replace this bad lot -- bring back the
Stuarts?
The current heir seems to be a chap in Liechtenstein
Consider -- this Hanover lot has run into the sands and petered out on
you.
Josef Wenzel v.u. zu Liechtenstein -- take a look at him, Brits -- you
could do MUCH worse with this Hanover lot you've inherited and probably
WILL. JOSEPH I, the Jacobites call him. Joseph is reported to be an
11th great-grandson of Charles I.
He's only NINE years old -- TRAINABLE.
Hell, he also probably speaks better English than your GEORGE I ever
did.
I nominate myself as King of the UK. I am quite willing to take on the
present monarch in combat by sword. I have two sons to found the
dynasty and two daughters to marry off (eventually) to seal peace
treaties. I could do with the extra house space too.


--

Julian Richards
medieval "at" richardsuk.f9.co.uk

Usenet is how from the comfort of your own living room, you can converse
with people that you would never want in your house.

THIS MESSAGE WAS POSTED FROM SOC.HISTORY.MEDIEVAL
P***@aol.com
2005-01-14 21:26:35 UTC
Permalink
The British press have no other news, the Tsunami is now 'passé' as far as
the media is concerned, British politics is 'sterile' - so why not bash another
institution that merits to be put to pasture anyway. Vive la République!

P-G (peter de loriol)
Tim Powys-Lybbe
2005-01-14 21:58:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by P***@aol.com
The British press have no other news, the Tsunami is now 'passé' as
far as the media is concerned, British politics is 'sterile' - so why
not bash another institution that merits to be put to pasture anyway.
Vive la République!
This is completely off topic.

That said I'll have a bash too. You have to remember that this is a
capitalist economy. Papers make money by selling more copies. A good
stir gets the punters digging the loose change out of thier pockets,
thereby enriching the papers owners. And it also suits the odd
republican, and probably jealous, journo.

And that said, who has not had a child who, at some time, makes them
cringe with the crazy things they have done? Be real!
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe ***@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
Doug McDonald
2005-01-14 21:34:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Are British Royals uniquely blunder-prone and abnormally stupid [some of
them] or is it just the far more aggressive British Press that creates
these hilarious British Royal Blunders, SNAFU's and Embarrassments -- a
combination of the two?
In the case of a 20 year old probably over-testosteroned guy
with an actual chin, such activities point to something
even stranger ... normality. Such people often do somewhat
dubious things on a whim. I'm sure that both our recent
Presidential candidates did similar stupidities while at
a certain east coast college. Even **I** while at a
more staid Southern school was party to a couple of
stunts, involving an alligator and a greased piglet and a library
reading room.

Doug McDonald
D. Spencer Hines
2005-01-14 22:06:26 UTC
Permalink
| stunts, involving an alligator and a greased piglet and a library
| reading room.

Not EQUIVALENT ACTS in any way to what Prince Harry, third in line to
succeed to the throne, did..

Harry is NOT just any twenty-year-old British kid. He fails to
understand that.

He has special RESPONSIBILITIES -- and with those responsibilities he
receives special PRIVILEGES -- NOT to be abused.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor

"Doug McDonald" <***@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message news:cs9dtv$f7k$***@news.ks.uiuc.edu...

| D. Spencer Hines wrote:
|
| > Are British Royals uniquely blunder-prone and abnormally stupid
| > [some of them] or is it just the far more aggressive British Press
| > that creates these hilarious British Royal Blunders, SNAFU's and
| > Embarrassments -- a combination of the two?
| >
|
| In the case of a 20 year old probably over-testosteroned guy
| with an actual chin, such activities point to something
| even stranger ... normality. Such people often do somewhat
| dubious things on a whim. I'm sure that both our recent
| Presidential candidates did similar stupidities while at
| a certain east coast college. Even **I** while at a
| more staid Southern school was party to a couple of
| stunts, involving an alligator and a greased piglet and a library
| reading room.
|
| Doug McDonald
tiglath
2005-01-14 23:02:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug McDonald
Even **I** while at a
more staid Southern school was party to a couple of
stunts, involving an alligator and a greased piglet and a library
reading room.
Hmmm.

Tell us more.
D. Spencer Hines
2005-01-14 21:57:31 UTC
Permalink
Hmmmmmm...

"British Grandmother Threw Grandson To Pit Bulls - Scotland Yard" would
be an Elegant Variation on this one.

DSH
--------------------

"Brazilian man threw mother to pit bulls - police"

14 Jan 2005 18:49:45 GMT

Source: Reuters

"SAO PAULO, Brazil, Jan 14 (Reuters) - A Brazilian man arguing with his
88-year-old mother threw her into a neighbors' yard where two pit bulls
mauled her to death, police said on Friday.

Painter Luiz Polidoro, 48, picked up his mother Maria and pitched her
over the yard wall during an argument on Thursday afternoon at her
house. Two pit bulls tied up in the neighboring yard then savaged her
and she died later in hospital, a police spokesman said.

"He is an alcoholic. He was robbing his mother's pension money so he
could drink," the dogs' owner, Helder Bento Rodrigues, told O Estado de
Sao Paulo newspaper.

Polidoro told police his mother had jumped over the wall on her own.

The newspaper said he had tried to rescue her. When police arrived, he
was cradling the blood-soaked woman.

Polidoro has been jailed in Sao Paulo and charged with murder."
-----------------------------

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor
G***@aol.com
2005-01-14 22:19:44 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/14/2005 5:02:08 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
***@gordonbanks.com writes:

I knew that King Alexander rode off a cliff, but didn't know one of the
Stuarts had. Which Stuart was it?



Oops, you are correct. I get all of my Scottish royal relations mixed up.
There weren't a large number of Scottish monarchs who were all that
intelligent, or talented anyway.

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas
G***@aol.com
2005-01-14 22:23:31 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/14/2005 5:02:10 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
***@hotmail.com writes:

Harry is NOT just any twenty-year-old British kid. He fails to
understand that.




Probably gets it from his papa, don't you think? Old big ears is no great
shakes for worrying too much about what the public thinks. Else he wouldn't
have had an affair with a married woman while he was wed to another, at least
not publicly.

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas
G***@aol.com
2005-01-14 22:26:28 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/14/2005 5:15:23 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
***@hotmail.com writes:

Hale has shot himself in the foot again.




Right, and it is a shame that said foot was not positioned in a certain
Hawaii resident's posterior at the time.

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas

OFF TOPIC, I KNOW, I KNOW, just couldn't help it. No more from me on this
topic.
adamadamant
2005-01-15 04:44:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Are British Royals uniquely blunder-prone and abnormally stupid
[some of them] or is it just the far more aggressive British
Press that creates these hilarious British Royal Blunders,
SNAFU's and Embarrassments -- a combination of the two?
Other Nations' Royals do not seem to be as pig-ignorantly
foolish and fanatically self-destructive as the British Royals.
But neither are they hounded by a tabloid press of the likes of
that which exists in the UK.

I'd have a lot more sympathy with the outrage shown by the media
and anybody thay can doorstep (from Joaquin Soler to Israeli
politicians), if they showed the same level to a musical comedy
currently very popular in London's West End: Mel Brooks' The
Producers.

However that is artistic and sophisticatedly comedic bad taste, and
in the name of freedom of expression it must be defended to the
hilt, because who knows what might be next: the media? Oh- and
btw, it wouldn't sell newspapers either.

Much easier to descend on a young man with typically juvenile bad
taste and with little practical freedom to reply- and that is what
I find is truly the nasty part of all this: the exploitation of
vulnerabilty for financial gain and the need of a cut-throat,
competive media to ensure that no-one is left out of a feeding
frenzy.

I suspect that is what Harry's Old Man is really pissed off about:
not anything intrinsic to wearing a nazi uniform (just like any
other Brit can- he went out and hired it), but that he hasn't
apparently learned anything yet about risks, however privately
undertaken, of exposing himself to the UK media.
Post by D. Spencer Hines
Fergie The Slut, Duchess of York -- surely one of the most
abysmally air-headed of them all. See Below.
You Brits might just want to replace this bad lot -- bring back
the Stuarts?
Yes, I might just return permanently to old Albion if a Charles II
character came back singing 'Happy Times Are Here Again'- but not,
of course, if he were in any sort of period costume.

Andy.
Roger LeBlanc
2005-01-15 09:49:20 UTC
Permalink
How very gauche of the prince! I guess he didn't realize members of "the
coalition" must only wear their swastikas in private.
CED
2005-01-16 02:49:44 UTC
Permalink
As a lurker who has been watching and enjoying the group's dicussions
of various on-topic subjects, I am disappointed that this thread has
strayed far from topic. Possibly this discussion would more nearly
approach topic (and be more interesting) if it were concerning Harry's
paternity.
CED
Peter A. Kincaid
2005-01-15 14:02:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Spencer Hines
It emerged that Harry hired his costume at a shop close to Highgrove,
Maud's Cotswold Costumes, popular with the young royals and their set.
Obviously the costume is well enough in demand for
the shop to be selling or renting it. Given that his
brother chose to be a leopard one can't help but wonder
what other choices a macho thinking young man had.

One can't help but point out that one story being overlooked
is that the tabloids broke their promise to leave the two
boys alone. There would not be any story if this was kept.
It was mainly naive of Harry to think that his bad joke was
for local consumption only due to the alledged ban. In the
end monetary gain is too much of a force to play with.

Best wishes!

Peter

P.S. Contrary to the impression given not all the Stuarts
were bad. James IV and James V were well loved. The
former did leave his country with financial woes but it was
he who elevated this then backwards have not country to
become a leading player in European politics.
Tony Hoskins
2005-01-15 18:58:50 UTC
Permalink
Could you please spare us innocent bystanders this unedifying
"exchange"?
Thanks.

Tony Hoskins
Santa Rosa, Califoronia


Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
History and Genealogy Library
Sonoma County Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404

707/545-0831, ext. 562
W***@aol.com
2005-01-16 16:47:07 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/16/2005 6:38:19 AM Pacific Standard Time,
Post by Michael W Cook
EVERY country in the civilised world has 'Rules of Engagement'.
NONE allows the shooting of children for throwing stones.
MWC
So NPR is wrong when it keeps trumpeting the Israeli soldiers who shoot at
children who are throwing stones. I'm sure I've heard that story at least a few
times over the past 10 years or so.
G***@aol.com
2005-01-16 22:56:48 UTC
Permalink
Don't you folks think we have had enough of this MODERN subject which has no
place what so ever on this list? Just to put my two cents in again; have
you ever heard of a person being seriously injured, or indeed, slain by a
thrown stone or two. Seems like they used to execute certain people like that in
the old days (Christian bible source).

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas


In a message dated 1/16/2005 5:15:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
***@eircom.net writes:

here is the concept of proportionate force in human rights
law. Do you believe that shooting stone-throwing kids is a
use of "proportionate force"?

"Amnesty Warns Of Israeli War Crimes

"He urged both sides to react to attacks with proportionate
force, saying Israeli troops had appeared to move from
firing tear gas to live rounds too quickly. "If a kid is
throwing stones at you, but is not putting any lives at
risk, then you do not shoot him," he said.""
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/110200-01.htm

I have noted that you seem to be a leftist person with
liberal views which dry up when Israeli excesses are
criticised.

You may be a Jewish left-wing person who can't see through
Israeli propaganda.

If true, that's unusual because Jewish left-leaning people
have been among the most vociferous critics of fascist
Sharon!
G***@aol.com
2005-01-17 02:15:54 UTC
Permalink
Hey MWC (I would address you by your name but you didn't care enough about
it to sign your message),

Yes, Israel was put upon the Arabs of the middle east by some of the
European powers. I can understand how the Arabs might become very irate over this
and try to fight Israel. Why though, is the United States to blame for all of
the present problems between the Israelis and the Arabs? How did you feel
about the United States defending Kuwait when Saddam invaded that small nation
because he wanted their oil? Were you as irate about the Iraquis invasion
of Kuwait as you are about the U.S. invasion of Iraq? What do think should
happen? Should all of the nations of the world get together and erase Israel
from the face of the earth? OK, then what would you do about all of the wars
between the Arabs? The middle east, Iraq in particular, was supposedly the
birthplace of civilization. Where in the hell is that civilization now?
Seems it is the most primitive section of the earth.

Now look, this thread has gone on long enough. Everyone has the right to
their own opinion of the situation and mine is just as radical as anyone
else's. Let's all go on to the study of Medieval Genealogy and get off the modern
day events. PLEASE

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas
Tony Hoskins
2005-01-17 06:21:48 UTC
Permalink
Hmmmmm???? Do the words "on topic" resonate at all?

T.
In today's newspaper Bush asserted that his questionable (my word, not
his) re-election was "all the accountability we need" regarding his
policies in the Middle East. Therefore, no need for investigatory
operations on anything. I'm thoroughly convinced now that the US has
been taken in a coup and is now a dictatorship. Bronwen
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...