| Author |
Message |
Andrew Gwilliam
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:04 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
On Thu, 19 May 2005 14:06:51 +0100, Mike Lyle wrote:
| Quote: | Peter Duncanson wrote:
[...]
He should not be confused with St. Columbanus or any of the St.
Colmans.
They insist on your leaving something on the plate at St Colmans.
Made them rich.
|
Mustard done.
--
Andrew Gwilliam
To email me, replace "bottomless_pit" with "silverhelm" |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wood Avens
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:14 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
On Thu, 19 May 2005 13:04:11 +0200, Ross Howard <gguiri@yahoo.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 19 May 2005 10:22:01 +0100, Matthew Huntbach
mmh@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> wrought:
Slightly different circumstances - Livingstone made a remark to the
journalist likening him to a concentration camp guard, the journalist
pointed out that he was Jewish, but Livingstone carried on with the
insult and refused to apologise. Livingstone ought to have backed down
immediately, recognising that likening a Jew to a concentration camp
guard is a much nastier insult than likening anyone else, and what
was excusable before he knew his victim was Jewish was inexcusable
afterwards.
There was things about both sides of that story that I was uneasy
about.
Yes, Livingstone was stupidly insensitive (to the sensitivities a
fairly significant part of the London electorate, if nothing more
heartfelt). Yet the essential point is one that arises often, and I
don't think society has yet come to terms with. Before making the
remark, Livingstone was unaware that the person he was talking to was
Jewish.
|
The part of this incident which seemed to have been widely ignored was
that the comparison was not with the concentration camp guard's
brutality but with the unquestioning obeying of unacceptable orders.
An alternative construal of the non-apology would be "What, you're
Jewish? Then you, of all people, have even more reason not to do this
sort of thing!" If Ken did ever explain it like this, though, it
wasn't reported.
Whichever, though, I agree with your unease, not least because of the
way people's sensitivities were exploited.
--
Katy Jennison
spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matthew Huntbach
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:20 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
On Thu, 19 May 2005, Andrew Gwilliam wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 19 May 2005 09:57:36 +0100, Matthew Huntbach wrote:
No country name on its stamps, either. Maybe we're being
minimalist, and thus modern.
This convention was established when postage stamps first came
into use - the UK was the first to issue them and therefore,
unlike any other country, was not required to put its name on its
own stamps. I don't think the same convention applies to coins -
I've seen a few coins from other countries that don't have the name.
UK stamps *do* have to have the king's/queen's head on them in the
place of the country name, regular stamps may consist of just this
and the price, but others may have the head as just a small
silhouette in a corner.
I appreciate the historical point, but that was 150 years ago or so. The
merest blink of an eye in terms of British cultural evolution, though.
|
I seem to recall there is some international convention which was
established at this time and still applies. Since postal services
have to co-operate so post sent from one country can be delivered in
another, such international conventions are needed.
| Quote: | You seem to know much more about this sort of thing than I (just having a
traveller's interest in his accumulated numismatic souvenirs), but I find
that Brazil, Costa Rica, Poland, Spain (pre-Euro), Isle of Man, Peru,
Canada, Germany (pre-Euro), Portugal (pre-Euro), Jersey, Switzerland,
Hungary, France (pre-Euro), Denmark, Uruguay, the United States, Belgium
(pre-Euro), Guatemala, the Netherlands (pre-Euro), Panama, Zimbabwe, Cook
Islands, Argentina, Gibraltar, the Czech Republic, Sweden, Mexico, Ireland
(pre-Euro), Fiji, Israel, New Zealand, Australia, Austria (pre-Euro),
Slovakia, and Hong Kong (pre-reunification) all have the country's name on
the coins; I couldn't find any exceptions? Yes, I did just sit down and
check all of those. 
|
The exceptions are quite few. I think some of them look like exceptions
because the country's name is written in its own script only.
| Quote: | I'm not quite sure what your point is regarding the monarch's head
(silhouette).
|
That it has to appear. By this international convention for stamps,
Britain need not (cannot?) put its name on its stamps, but must put the
monarch's head on them.
| Quote: | The "country name" was part of the title of the king/queen rather than
there as the country name. The "IND IMP" disappeared in 1948, when India
gained independence, necessitating a slight redesign of the coinage.
The "REX BRIT" actually stood for "Rex Brittanorum" (not quite sure this
is exactly the right Latin) meaning "King of all Britons". For the
first year of the current queen's reign, the title "REG BRIT" occurred
on the coins, but this was withdrawn the next year and has not occurred
on British coins since.
I suspect that the expanded version of "Brit." has varied from time to
time. I've got a 1914 penny here which has "BRITT:OMN:REX" (inter alia),
which would certainly tie in with "King of All Britons", or maybe "King of
All Britain". A few other George V coins have the same thing, but my one
Victorian coin (an 1884 farthing) has "BRITT:REG" (and no reference to
India; I've got 1887 in my mind for creation of the new title?).
|
I'm relying on memory. Now you've mentioned it, I think it was
"BRITT:OMN:REX" that appeared on the coins. I definitely recall
it meaning "of all Britons" and not "of all Britain", and the
"-orum" ending in Latin is plural genitive.
Queen Victoria assumed the title "Empress of India" in 1877. I'm not
sure whether this led to an immediate update of all the coinage, so
maybe it's possible the farthing had not been updated by 1884.
The first florin in 1849 was known as the "Godless florin" because
the "F :" (for "Fidei Defensor") was missed off, which caused
ructions and was fixed by a redesign. Of course, it's a bit of a cheek
that a title given personally to Henry VIII by the Pope as a reward
for his opposition to Protestantism should have been retained not
only after Henry turned round on this, but by his succcessors as well.
| Quote: | I wonder why they have the Rex/Regina afterwards, and not beforehand?
|
Because you can do that sort of thing in Latin. The suffixes rather
than the word order tells you how things fit together.
Matthew Huntbach |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew Gwilliam
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:46 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
On Thu, 19 May 2005 15:20:11 +0100, Matthew Huntbach wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 19 May 2005, Andrew Gwilliam wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2005 09:57:36 +0100, Matthew Huntbach wrote:
No country name on its stamps, either. Maybe we're being
minimalist, and thus modern.
This convention was established when postage stamps first came
into use - the UK was the first to issue them and therefore,
unlike any other country, was not required to put its name on its
own stamps. I don't think the same convention applies to coins -
I've seen a few coins from other countries that don't have the name.
UK stamps *do* have to have the king's/queen's head on them in the
place of the country name, regular stamps may consist of just this
and the price, but others may have the head as just a small
silhouette in a corner.
I appreciate the historical point, but that was 150 years ago or so. The
merest blink of an eye in terms of British cultural evolution, though.
I seem to recall there is some international convention which was
established at this time and still applies. Since postal services
have to co-operate so post sent from one country can be delivered in
another, such international conventions are needed.
You seem to know much more about this sort of thing than I (just having a
traveller's interest in his accumulated numismatic souvenirs), but I find
that Brazil, Costa Rica, Poland, Spain (pre-Euro), Isle of Man, Peru,
Canada, Germany (pre-Euro), Portugal (pre-Euro), Jersey, Switzerland,
Hungary, France (pre-Euro), Denmark, Uruguay, the United States, Belgium
(pre-Euro), Guatemala, the Netherlands (pre-Euro), Panama, Zimbabwe, Cook
Islands, Argentina, Gibraltar, the Czech Republic, Sweden, Mexico, Ireland
(pre-Euro), Fiji, Israel, New Zealand, Australia, Austria (pre-Euro),
Slovakia, and Hong Kong (pre-reunification) all have the country's name on
the coins; I couldn't find any exceptions? Yes, I did just sit down and
check all of those. ;-)
The exceptions are quite few. I think some of them look like exceptions
because the country's name is written in its own script only.
I'm not quite sure what your point is regarding the monarch's head
(silhouette).
That it has to appear. By this international convention for stamps,
Britain need not (cannot?) put its name on its stamps, but must put the
monarch's head on them.
The "country name" was part of the title of the king/queen rather than
there as the country name. The "IND IMP" disappeared in 1948, when India
gained independence, necessitating a slight redesign of the coinage.
The "REX BRIT" actually stood for "Rex Brittanorum" (not quite sure this
is exactly the right Latin) meaning "King of all Britons". For the
first year of the current queen's reign, the title "REG BRIT" occurred
on the coins, but this was withdrawn the next year and has not occurred
on British coins since.
I suspect that the expanded version of "Brit." has varied from time to
time. I've got a 1914 penny here which has "BRITT:OMN:REX" (inter alia),
which would certainly tie in with "King of All Britons", or maybe "King of
All Britain". A few other George V coins have the same thing, but my one
Victorian coin (an 1884 farthing) has "BRITT:REG" (and no reference to
India; I've got 1887 in my mind for creation of the new title?).
I'm relying on memory. Now you've mentioned it, I think it was
"BRITT:OMN:REX" that appeared on the coins. I definitely recall
it meaning "of all Britons" and not "of all Britain", and the
"-orum" ending in Latin is plural genitive.
Queen Victoria assumed the title "Empress of India" in 1877. I'm not
sure whether this led to an immediate update of all the coinage, so
maybe it's possible the farthing had not been updated by 1884.
The first florin in 1849 was known as the "Godless florin" because
the "F:" (for "Fidei Defensor") was missed off, which caused
ructions and was fixed by a redesign. Of course, it's a bit of a cheek
that a title given personally to Henry VIII by the Pope as a reward
for his opposition to Protestantism should have been retained not
only after Henry turned round on this, but by his succcessors as well.
|
Hell, they were still claiming to be King of France until 1801!
| Quote: | I wonder why they have the Rex/Regina afterwards, and not beforehand?
Because you can do that sort of thing in Latin. The suffixes rather
than the word order tells you how things fit together.
|
Yes, but there still tends to be a preferred word order for certain
expressions (especially when the Latin isn't a native language).
--
Andrew Gwilliam
To email me, replace "bottomless_pit" with "silverhelm" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Aitken
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 9:00 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
On Thu, 19 May 2005 14:38:11 +0100, Andrew Gwilliam
<bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | I suspect that the expanded version of "Brit." has varied from time to
time. I've got a 1914 penny here which has "BRITT:OMN:REX" (inter alia),
which would certainly tie in with "King of All Britons", or maybe "King of
All Britain". A few other George V coins have the same thing, but my one
Victorian coin (an 1884 farthing) has "BRITT:REG" (and no reference to
India; I've got 1887 in my mind for creation of the new title?).
I wonder why they have the Rex/Regina afterwards, and not beforehand?
|
For more than you could possibly want to know about all this, see
http://www.heraldica.org/topics/royalty/royalstyle.htm#uk1
The Latin and English titles do not necessarily correspond.
--
Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 10:18 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
the Omrud wrote:
| Quote: | Mike Lyle spake thusly:
the Omrud wrote:
[...]
It's just occurred to me that Starsky or Hutch was called
something
like Paul Michael-Glaser.
Unconfuse me, please. I met a violinist called Jack Glatzer many
years ago, but regularly hear of one called "Jack Glazer": are
they
the same virtuoso?
Who, me? Sorry, I don't do violins. Nasty scratchy things.
American violinists are just too far beyond my sphere of musical
influence. British bassoonists of the 1990s: that I can do.
The Glatzer one has his own web site:
http://www.jackglatzer.com/
|
He had hair in those days. From the website, I very nearly discovered
there was a composer called "Scunthorpe", but sharper focus
prevailed.
Jedediah Scunthorpe's Divertissement in A minor tested the forces of
the NOW nearly to breaking-point...
--
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew Gwilliam
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 11:06 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
On Thu, 19 May 2005 17:18:12 +0100, Mike Lyle wrote:
| Quote: | the Omrud wrote:
Mike Lyle spake thusly:
the Omrud wrote:
[...]
It's just occurred to me that Starsky or Hutch was called
something
like Paul Michael-Glaser.
Unconfuse me, please. I met a violinist called Jack Glatzer many
years ago, but regularly hear of one called "Jack Glazer": are
they
the same virtuoso?
Who, me? Sorry, I don't do violins. Nasty scratchy things.
American violinists are just too far beyond my sphere of musical
influence. British bassoonists of the 1990s: that I can do.
The Glatzer one has his own web site:
http://www.jackglatzer.com/
He had hair in those days. From the website, I very nearly discovered
there was a composer called "Scunthorpe", but sharper focus
prevailed.
Jedediah Scunthorpe's Divertissement in A minor tested the forces of
the NOW nearly to breaking-point...
|
If not a composer, then...?
--
Andrew Gwilliam
To email me, replace "bottomless_pit" with "silverhelm" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the Omrud
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 11:08 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
Mike Lyle spake thusly:
| Quote: | the Omrud wrote:
Mike Lyle spake thusly:
the Omrud wrote:
[...]
It's just occurred to me that Starsky or Hutch was called
something
like Paul Michael-Glaser.
Unconfuse me, please. I met a violinist called Jack Glatzer many
years ago, but regularly hear of one called "Jack Glazer": are
they
the same virtuoso?
Who, me? Sorry, I don't do violins. Nasty scratchy things.
American violinists are just too far beyond my sphere of musical
influence. British bassoonists of the 1990s: that I can do.
The Glatzer one has his own web site:
http://www.jackglatzer.com/
He had hair in those days. From the website, I very nearly discovered
there was a composer called "Scunthorpe", but sharper focus
prevailed.
|
I like the fact that the quote comes from "The Oxford Mail", that
well-known arbiter in the field of classical music.
| Quote: | Jedediah Scunthorpe's Divertissement in A minor tested the forces of
the NOW nearly to breaking-point...
|
I admit to never having heard of Sculthorpe. Or Ysaye for that
matter. Ah, a living Australian and a 19th Century Belgian.
--
David
=====
replace usenet with the |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Duncanson
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 11:44 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
On Thu, 19 May 2005 14:41:07 +0100, Andrew Gwilliam
<bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:38:42 +0100, Peter Duncanson wrote:
On Wed, 18 May 2005 23:57:45 +0000 (UTC), Areff <me@privacy.net> wrote:
Areff wrote:
Andrew Gwilliam wrote:
I would've said that "Malcolm" was Scottish. But is it of Gaelic origin,
or is it another foreign import to go with David, Alexander, and so on[1]?
It appears to be native Gaelic, meaning "follower of the Dove [St.
Columba]".
Well, except that it contains an imported name inside it (Columba).
Columba is the Latin form of the Gaelic Colm.
He was born in Ireland (County Donegal) where he is known as Colm.
He is also known as Colm-cille [1], the suffix cille meaning "of the
Churches".
He should not be confused with St. Columbanus or any of the St. Colmans.
[1] Also Colmcille and Colm Cille
Is that "cille" of Gaelic origin?
|
I understand that "cille" is a Gaelic word.
| Quote: | I can't see an obvious borrowing from
Latin or Greek, which must be pretty unusual for a European language.
|
--
Peter Duncanson
UK (posting from a.u.e) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 11:54 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
the Omrud wrote:
| Quote: | Mike Lyle spake thusly:
the Omrud wrote:
[...]
The Glatzer one has his own web site:
http://www.jackglatzer.com/
He had hair in those days. From the website, I very nearly
discovered
there was a composer called "Scunthorpe", but sharper focus
prevailed.
I like the fact that the quote comes from "The Oxford Mail", that
well-known arbiter in the field of classical music.
|
It does appear to cast a certain doubt. But though it isn't
Manchester, Oxford _is_ a town bubbling over with music, and the Mail
must have access to some pretty OK people in the organised noise
profession. It's where I met Maestro Jack, early in his career: he
was doing a college subscription concert with great aplomb. Perhaps
the Mail holds him in a special fondness.
| Quote: |
Jedediah Scunthorpe's Divertissement in A minor tested the forces
of
the NOW nearly to breaking-point...
I admit to never having heard of Sculthorpe. Or Ysaye for that
matter. Ah, a living Australian and a 19th Century Belgian.
|
A nearly-famous Belgian, yet! R3 mentions the name once in a while,
but that's all I can report.
--
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Dean
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2005 4:20 am
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
Matthew Huntbach wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 18 May 2005, Ross Howard wrote:
I am a United fan, but I haven't been to Old Trafford for 35 years.
Yes, it is in your blood in a way. I've never liked the club or any
of its players much since the '68 European Cup -- I'm sorry but
Keane is *not* Crerand, Giggs can't dribble dog drool next to Best
(or even Willie Morgan), and don't even get me started on that
posing French poet -- but I still follow the results of important
matches and even got moist-eyed when they beat Bayern to win the
European Cup.
I can see the point of supporting a football club when its players
come from the areas it is named after, or even if they hadn't but the
club had burtured their talents from the start. But why would anyone
support a football club when its players could come from anywhere,
and are
hired men who next season could be playing for any of the other
leading football clubs?
|
Forget "to be etc" - *that* is the question. And one my wife frequently
asks. And I have no answer. Except maybe the club is like King Charles's
axe.
--
John Dean
Oxford |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matti Lamprhey
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2005 9:25 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
"Andrew Gwilliam" <bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk> wrote...
| Quote: | On Thu, 19 May 2005 10:22:01 +0100, Matthew Huntbach wrote:
[...]
- Livingstone made a remark to the journalist likening him to a
concentration camp guard, the journalist pointed out that he was
Jewish, but Livingstone carried on with the insult and refused to
apologise. Livingstone ought to have backed down immediately,
recognising that likening a Jew to a concentration camp guard is a
much nastier insult than likening anyone else, and what was
excusable before he knew his victim was Jewish was inexcusable
afterwards.
I'm fairly sure that he knew beforehand that the reporter was Jewish.
At the very least the remark was extremely crass, and the subsequent
arrogant refusal to apologise was, well, arrogant.
|
See my reply to Katie -- his remark was not at all crass but very
well-judged, and he should be applauded rather than criticized for
making it.
Matti |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matti Lamprhey
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2005 9:27 pm
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
"Wood Avens" <woodavens@askjennison.com> wrote...
| Quote: | Ross Howard <gguiri@yahoo.com> wrote:
Matthew Huntbach <mmh@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> wrought:
Slightly different circumstances - Livingstone made a remark to the
journalist likening him to a concentration camp guard, the
journalist pointed out that he was Jewish, but Livingstone carried
on with the insult and refused to apologise. Livingstone ought to
have backed down immediately, recognising that likening a Jew to a
concentration camp guard is a much nastier insult than likening
anyone else, and what was excusable before he knew his victim was
Jewish was inexcusable afterwards.
There was things about both sides of that story that I was uneasy
about.
Yes, Livingstone was stupidly insensitive (to the sensitivities a
fairly significant part of the London electorate, if nothing more
heartfelt). Yet the essential point is one that arises often, and I
don't think society has yet come to terms with. Before making the
remark, Livingstone was unaware that the person he was talking to was
Jewish.
The part of this incident which seemed to have been widely ignored was
that the comparison was not with the concentration camp guard's
brutality but with the unquestioning obeying of unacceptable orders.
An alternative construal of the non-apology would be "What, you're
Jewish? Then you, of all people, have even more reason not to do this
sort of thing!" If Ken did ever explain it like this, though, it
wasn't reported.
|
He was certainly reported giving that explanation, but I think it suited
the meeja to ignore that and to continue promoting the incident as an
example of Livingstone's crass insensitivity.
Actually, I'm not sure that Ross is correct when he says that
Livingstone was unaware that the reporter was Jewish when he made the
remark.
This misreporting reminds me of two other semi-recent cases: Rumsfeld's
"Old Europe", which was not intended as a criticism of France & Germany,
and Chirac's "We won't support today any UN resolution which contains an
ultimatum" which was foreverafter reported without the crucial "today".
Matti |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew Gwilliam
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat May 21, 2005 12:30 am
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
On Fri, 20 May 2005 16:25:43 +0100, Matti Lamprhey wrote:
| Quote: | "Andrew Gwilliam" <bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk> wrote...
On Thu, 19 May 2005 10:22:01 +0100, Matthew Huntbach wrote:
[...]
- Livingstone made a remark to the journalist likening him to a
concentration camp guard, the journalist pointed out that he was
Jewish, but Livingstone carried on with the insult and refused to
apologise. Livingstone ought to have backed down immediately,
recognising that likening a Jew to a concentration camp guard is a
much nastier insult than likening anyone else, and what was
excusable before he knew his victim was Jewish was inexcusable
afterwards.
I'm fairly sure that he knew beforehand that the reporter was Jewish.
At the very least the remark was extremely crass, and the subsequent
arrogant refusal to apologise was, well, arrogant.
See my reply to Katie -- his remark was not at all crass but very
well-judged, and he should be applauded rather than criticized for
making it.
|
I have to disagree with this, likening anyone to a concentration guard in
everyday life is crass.
--
Andrew Gwilliam
To email me, replace "bottomless_pit" with "silverhelm" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matti Lamprhey
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat May 21, 2005 1:36 am
Post subject: Re: Manchester temperature? |
|
|
"Andrew Gwilliam" <bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk> wrote...
| Quote: | On Fri, 20 May 2005 16:25:43 +0100, Matti Lamprhey wrote:
"Andrew Gwilliam" <bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk> wrote...
On Thu, 19 May 2005 10:22:01 +0100, Matthew Huntbach wrote:
[...]
- Livingstone made a remark to the journalist likening him to a
concentration camp guard, the journalist pointed out that he was
Jewish, but Livingstone carried on with the insult and refused to
apologise. Livingstone ought to have backed down immediately,
recognising that likening a Jew to a concentration camp guard is a
much nastier insult than likening anyone else, and what was
excusable before he knew his victim was Jewish was inexcusable
afterwards.
I'm fairly sure that he knew beforehand that the reporter was
Jewish. At the very least the remark was extremely crass, and the
subsequent arrogant refusal to apologise was, well, arrogant.
See my reply to Katie -- his remark was not at all crass but very
well-judged, and he should be applauded rather than criticized for
making it.
I have to disagree with this, likening anyone to a concentration guard
in everyday life is crass.
|
This is the rough gist of it: Livingstone was annoyed by the reporter's
questioning, and complained to him about it. The reporter implied that
he didn't like what he was doing, but that he had been told to do it and
was therefore just folllowing orders. Livingstone pointed out that this
was the excuse trotted out by those accused of war crimes at Nuremburg,
and that the reporter was therefore acting just like a concentration
camp guard. I think that Livingstone deliberately chose this metaphor
because he knew the impact that it would have on this particular
reporter, and I really don't see how "crass" is an appropriate term for
it.
Matti |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in