atw: Re: The Queen's English? - now OFF TOPIC
- From: "Hallett, Michelle" <Michelle.Hallett@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 14:19:03 +1000
Christine,
I probably agree with most of what you're saying but this is the wrong
example. Sorry but I just can't see Charles as courageous and so many
other people have cruel fathers and absent mothers and make better lives
for themselves with a lot less going for them.
Michelle
________________________________
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christine Kent
Sent: Tuesday, 22 May 2007 4:58 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: The Queen's English? - now OFF TOPIC
Actually, we have now worked around to where I was headed for. We cow
tow to people who are offended at this or offended at that, and we are
not able to use even "true" language if someone decides to get offended
- like "in the year of our Lord", but political correctness is quite
arbitrary and not actually based on genuine caring or even fairness.
We are allowed to be and are even encouraged to be as abusive as we like
about not-too-pretty and strong minded mature age Anglo Saxon women.
There is also no protection for mystically minded naive, deep and
intense Anglo Saxon men. There is no political correctness that tells
us we must be nice to these cultural minorities (to which I belong), so
the floodgates open and the pent up abuse gushes out. Who is more able
to defend themselves, Dipierdomenico when someone calls him a Wog on a
football field or a shy and mystical misfit bullied by a cruel Greek
father and an emotionally absent and totally domineering mother, and now
having to deal with the social abuse of the woman he loves. I really do
admire this man immensely - just for surviving and eventually graduating
into leading his own life - that takes courage.
One group should not be earmarked for abuse, while another is protected
- that is the basis of bigotry and every human evil that has ever
occurred on earth. (Now I'm sure that's an overstatement, but what the
heck, it has drama on its side!)
Thus endeth the sermon in the year of our Lord 2007.
Amen
Christine
________________________________
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hallett,
Michelle
Sent: Tuesday, 22 May 2007 6:18 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: The Queen's English? - now OFF TOPIC
Not sure I agree with you there Christine. I can understand that
any 20 year old woman had stars in her eyes about marriage, even an
aristocratic one. Add to that the media fuss and a young person who
hasn't yet come to realise that the media is all about fuss with no
substance.
I think Charles didn't have the guts to challenge mummy and
daddy when he first met Camilla and they said she wasn't suitable to be
Queen. So they all took advantage of naive 20 year old Diana. It took
Diana's death to make changes to all of them and I think both Charles
and Camilla owe her.
Michelle
________________________________
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christine Kent
Sent: Tuesday, 22 May 2007 2:39 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: The Queen's English? - now OFF TOPIC
My God!!! You girls are Sooooooo nasty. There is nothing funny
in abusing a woman who does not stimulate stereotypical male fantasies.
My respect for Charles went UP over the Camilla thing. A man
saw virtue in a mature age woman who was his emotional and intellectual
equal, and was bored witless with the silly little "princess" who failed
to understand what everyone else knew, that she was no more than a brood
mare. She was brought up as a aristocrat so had no excuse for not
understanding how the royals have always conducted their marriages.
Poor little Mary is discovering that little truth now too - but she has
more excuse for believing in the fairytale princess myth than Dianna had
- at least she was not raised in those circles.
It's good that one man one earth has some depth. Gives us hope
that there may be some more. Ahhh, Charlie, the man of my dreams!
ck
________________________________
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hope, Debbie
Sent: Tuesday, 22 May 2007 4:23 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: The Queen's English? - now OFF TOPIC
Thanks Matilda--
You summed it up perfectly with one word - 'adulterer'.
I was actually going to add 'cow' in there somewhere as well.
Debbie
________________________________
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of MATILDA REICH
Sent: Tuesday, 22 May 2007 4:18 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: The Queen's English?
It's not harsh, it's funny! Everyone knows bonnie
Prince Charlie loves his horses, even two legged ones.
The demise of Diana had more to do with her brain,
emotional stability, marrying an adulterer at such a tender age, than
her looks. Poor lass.
>>> slb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 22/05/07 4:04 pm >>>
Jeez, Debbie, that's a bit harsh.
Would you say that to her face? To anyone?
I have zero interest in things royal, but Diana Spencer
was good looking
and look where that all ended up.
Stuart
Debbie Hope said:
> Camilla the Fugly
**************************************************
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date:
21/05/2007 2:01 PM
************************************************************************
*****
This email, and any files transmitted with it, are confidential
and intended for use by the addressee only. The confidential nature of
the information contained in the email and/or file attachment is not
waived, lost or destroyed if it is sent to other than the addressee. Use
or dissemination of the information contained in the email and/or file
attachment, by a recipient other than the addressee, may cause
commercial damage to both/either the sender and/or addressee. If you are
not the addressee of this email/file attachment contact the sender
immediately and delete this email/file attachment.
All email communications to and from this company are filtered
and stored for risk management purposes in accordance with our Computer
and Email Policies. Please contact our Privacy Manager on (02) 8668 6947
if you would like further information about our Policies in regard to
these issues.
************************************************************************
*****
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date:
21/05/2007 2:01 PM
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date:
21/05/2007 2:01 PM
*****************************************************************************
This email, and any files transmitted with it, are confidential and intended
for use by the addressee only. The confidential nature of the information
contained in the email and/or file attachment is not waived, lost or destroyed
if it is sent to other than the addressee. Use or dissemination of the
information contained in the email and/or file attachment, by a recipient other
than the addressee, may cause commercial damage to both/either the sender
and/or addressee. If you are not the addressee of this email/file attachment
contact the sender immediately and delete this email/file attachment.
All email communications to and from this company are filtered and stored for
risk management purposes in accordance with our Computer and Email Policies.
Please contact our Privacy Manager on (02) 8668 6947 if you would like further
information about our Policies in regard to these issues.
*****************************************************************************
Other related posts:
