Is it possible to get Chicken Kiev in Kiev?
Dr. Reinhold Aman
Stupid old cunt "Polar" <sme...@mindspring.com> drooled:
> On Sat, 18 May 2002 18:11:47 GMT, Keeger wrote:
[...]
>>I wonder if president Kenndy had visited Hamburg instead of Berlin,
>>would he have declared "Ich bin ein Hamburger!"?
Yes, and he would have been as *100% correct* as when he said, "Ich
bin ein Berliner!" The same goes for "Ich bin ein Frankfurter!" or
"... ein Wiener!"
That obnoxious old idiot-woman "Polar" (Sara Meric Goebbels) once
again posted the same stupid shit she's posted before:
> Regardless, it would have been equally ungrammatical.
JFK's exclamation was not "ungrammatical" but absolutely correct.
That ancient nutcase "Polar" does not even know what "ungrammatical"
means but has the chutzpah to meddle in foreign languages. Calling a
"cat" a "dog" is not "ungrammatical," you silly old cunt.
> You *are* aware that when JFK said "Ich bin ein Berliner",
> he was saying "I am a jelly doughnut"?
Like *fuck* he did, you goddamn asshole. Ever since an incompetent
professor of German in Ohio came up with this bullshit, every cretin
from the "New York Times" on down to such ignorant riffraff as "Polar"
has parroted this nonsense. What JFK said, in translation, was, "I am
a Berliner [a citizen of Berlin, like you]."
> Correct German would have been "Ich bin Berliner"
> (or, in your hypothetical, Ich bin Hamburger).
Bullshit! "Polar," you old and crazy cunt, your command of German and
any other foreign language *sucks*, so shut your stupid trap and stop
repeating and spreading this idiocy and urban legend. An ignorant
moron like you does not know or understand the fine aspects of meaning
-- nor the regional usage throughout German-speaking countries --
regarding the indefinite article "ein/e" ('a'), so SHUT THE FUCK UP
already!
Several scholarly articles have been published to refute that "jelly
doughnut" canard, but as long as ignorant journalists and fuckin'
cretins like "Polar" mindlessly repeat that crap, the stupid masses
will believe that nonsense.
--
R. Aman
http://www.maledicta.ORG
Padraig Breathnach
>[Crossposted to <alt.usage.english>]
>
>Stupid old cunt "Polar" <sme...@mindspring.com> drooled:
>
<snip comments>
Why bother crossposting this?
PB
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
1: So that you can make another of your trademark
insipid contributions to AUE.
2: To stamp out that JFK "jelly donut" idiocy spread
by non-clinical morons & cretins such as "Polar."
3: To entertain my AUE buddies & budettes worldwide.
4: To document once again to her 3-4 stupid supporters
what a fuckin' asshole that crazy old cunt "Polar" is.
5: To give that paranoid old snitch-bitch more material
to pass on to her FBI Agent's "Stalking" file.
Good enough, P.B.?
--
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
M A L E D I C T A
P.O. Box 14123
Santa Rosa, CA 95402, USA
http://www.maledicta.ORG
Padraig Breathnach
>Padraig Breathnach wrote:
>
>> am...@sonic.net (Dr. Reinhold Aman) wrote:
>
>> >[Crossposted to <alt.usage.english>]
>
>> >Stupid old cunt "Polar" <sme...@mindspring.com> drooled:
>
>> <snip comments>
>>
>> Why bother crossposting this?
>
>1: So that you can make another of your trademark
> insipid contributions to AUE.
>
I don't need your help for that.
>2: To stamp out that JFK "jelly donut" idiocy spread
> by non-clinical morons & cretins such as "Polar."
>
That doesn't explain why you crossposted.
>3: To entertain my AUE buddies & budettes worldwide.
>
I believe that.
>4: To document once again to her 3-4 stupid supporters
> what a fuckin' asshole that crazy old cunt "Polar" is.
>
Do you really believe that you are achieving that?
>5: To give that paranoid old snitch-bitch more material
> to pass on to her FBI Agent's "Stalking" file.
>
Not even you believe that.
>Good enough, P.B.?
>
Not for me.
PB
Mark Barratt
wrote:
>"Reinhold (Rey) Aman" <am...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>>Padraig Breathnach wrote:
>>> Why bother crossposting this?
>>
>>1: So that you can make another of your trademark
>> insipid contributions to AUE.
>>
>I don't need your help for that.
Has anybody else noticed that the opposite of "insipid" is "sapid"?
Isn't that interesting?
Padraig Breathnach
Noticed? How could I have, when I never knew the word existed? But
it's a good and useful word, with which I will pepper my conversation
for the next while.
Thank you, Mark, for that contribution to taste.
PB
Peter J Ross
removed the following benign growth from Mark Barratt:
> Has anybody else noticed that the opposite of "insipid" is "sapid"?
> Isn't that interesting?
How could it not be interesting?
On the other hand, the opposite of "sapient" /isn't/ "incipient".
PJR :-)
Padraig Breathnach
>Mark Barratt <mark.b...@chello.be> wrote:
>
>>Has anybody else noticed that the opposite of "insipid" is "sapid"?
>>Isn't that interesting?
>
>Noticed? How could I have, when I never knew the word existed? But
>it's a good and useful word, with which I will pepper my conversation
>for the next while.
>
>Thank you, Mark, for that contribution to taste.
>
So I went off and tried the word on herself. No special reaction. It
is, apparently, part of her normal vocabulary. So now I'll have to
find somebody else to impress with my new word.
PB
Albert Marshall
Breathnach <padr...@iol.ie> writes
Aman's brain from reality. He really seems to think that the rest of us
are interested in his obsessions.
The fact that no reasonable person would agree with his behaviour
doesn't seem to penetrate his prejudices.
--
Albert Marshall
Mark Barratt
Of course not. The opposite of "incipient" is "soon".
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
> Padraig Breathnach <padr...@iol.ie> writes:
> >am...@sonic.net (Dr. Reinhold Aman) wrote:
> >
> >>[Crossposted to <alt.usage.english>]
> >>
> >>Stupid old cunt "Polar" <sme...@mindspring.com> drooled:
> ><snip comments>
> >Why bother crossposting this?
> Because there are a couple of people whose mere existence
> decouples Aman's brain from reality.
Thank you, Dr Fraud. No charge, I hope. The mere existence of
certain people doesn't bother me. It's their fuckin' obnoxious or
stupid or inconsiderate OT posts that piss me off. Unlike sheep like
yourself, Al, I let them know. If more readers had the guts to tell
such scum to fuck off and die, there would be far less shit posted.
> He really seems to think that the rest of us
> are interested in his obsessions.
Some are, some ain't.
> The fact that no reasonable person would agree with his behaviour
> doesn't seem to penetrate his prejudices.
Instead of moralistic lecturing, you should work on your logic and
language: prejudices can't be "penetrated."
Thanks for stopping in, Albert. Now be a good chap and beat it.
Oh, and don't forget to put me back in your killfile. Merci.
--
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)
"Dr. Reinhold Aman" wrote:
>
> [Crossposted to <alt.usage.english>]
>
(foul-mouthed tirade against a perfectly reasonable post by
"Polar" snipped)
A) what does a dispute about correct German usage have to
do with ENGLISH usage? (Has no one told you they are two
separate languages?)
B) You might commence your interest in "English usage" by
improving your vocabulary to a degree where you need not
resort to foul language to express disagreement with other
posters.
C) Do you really think personal attacks against the
original poster strengthen your own argument?
Padraig Breathnach
>"Dr. Reinhold Aman" wrote:
>>
>> [Crossposted to <alt.usage.english>]
>>
>
>(foul-mouthed tirade against a perfectly reasonable post by
>"Polar" snipped)
>
>
Evelyn,
A little background might help you to understand Rey's post.
In the past Polar was an active participant in AUE. She and Rey had a
big falling out. She ceased posting in AUE, except for the occasional
item which leaks in because it is crossposted. As she no longer
presents an obvious target for Rey's ire, it seems that he feels a
need to seek out some of her posts in other groups in order to
continue the feud. He likes to let AUE regulars know about this.
As you will have observed from his vigourous response to your post, he
does not shy away from dispute.
Let me suggest answers to your questions:
>A) what does a dispute about correct German usage have to
>do with ENGLISH usage? (Has no one told you they are two
>separate languages?)
>
His post had nothing to do with English usage. That fact is irrelevant
to him. (It might be argued that the saying has now been adopted into
English, much as phrases like "a priori" or "cul de sac" have been,
but I think Rey is not, in this context, very interested in any such
justification.)
>B) You might commence your interest in "English usage" by
>improving your vocabulary to a degree where you need not
>resort to foul language to express disagreement with other
>posters.
>
In this regard I would be a hypocrite if I endorsed your criticism of
him. Rey has a special interest in verbal aggression. It's not
necessarily bad English, albeit not to the liking of all. That does
not bother Rey.
>C) Do you really think personal attacks against the
>original poster strengthen your own argument?
>
The personal attack against the original poster is his argument; the
material to which he is responding is simply the hook on which he
hangs it.
Now that you know this, you can make a better-informed decision about
continuing your conversation with Rey.
PB
Polar
<padr...@iol.ie> wrote:
[...]
>In the past Polar was an active participant in AUE. She and Rey had a
>big falling out. She ceased posting in AUE, except for the occasional
>item which leaks in because it is crossposted. As she no longer
>presents an obvious target for Rey's ire, it seems that he feels a
>need to seek out some of her posts in other groups in order to
>continue the feud. He likes to let AUE regulars know about this.
[...]
Thanks for your kind message, Padraig. A few minor corrections:
I did not leave AUE because of any one individual; rather because
the style of the NG no longer suited me.
I did not have a "falling out" with any one individual.
More than that, I cannot say, since I am under the strictest
instructions not to make any comment about any individual or
individuals who might or might not be committing cyber-stalking
involving slander, libel, and defamation of character.
Matters such as this are usually placed in the hands of the
competent authorities.
--
Polar
Padraig Breathnach
>On Mon, 20 May 2002 14:24:57 GMT, Padraig Breathnach
><padr...@iol.ie> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>In the past Polar was an active participant in AUE. She and Rey had a
>>big falling out. She ceased posting in AUE, except for the occasional
>>item which leaks in because it is crossposted. As she no longer
>>presents an obvious target for Rey's ire, it seems that he feels a
>>need to seek out some of her posts in other groups in order to
>>continue the feud. He likes to let AUE regulars know about this.
>
>[...]
>
>Thanks for your kind message, Padraig. A few minor corrections:
>
>I did not leave AUE because of any one individual; rather because
>the style of the NG no longer suited me.
>
Please note that I took care not to say that you left as a consequence
of anything in particular.
>I did not have a "falling out" with any one individual.
>
Well, I'm not going to fall out with you over it. My recollection is
that, during the Mimi wars, you and Rey had some exchanges which were
not friendly. My memory on this may be faulty.
...
PB
Simon R. Hughes
>
> More than that, I cannot say, since I am under the strictest
> instructions not to make any comment about any individual or
> individuals who might or might not be committing cyber-stalking
> involving slander, libel, and defamation of character.
>
> Matters such as this are usually placed in the hands of the
> competent authorities.
Y'know Polar, a little while back we had an email exchange in which
you agreed that posting provocative remarks like the above was
probably not a particularly clever thing to do.
And here you are doing the same thing again.
--
Simon R. Hughes
<!-- signature-challenged -->
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
First, welcome back in AUE, Sara Meric Goebbels! Now that you've
posted in my "home" newsgroup, AUE, I can freely reply to you without
being accused of and prosecuted for criminally "cyber-stalking" you,
right? Ask your "competent authorities"; they'll agree with me. In
AUE I can whip your fat ass sans fear of violating some goofy Federal
or State law, right? That's so neat.
> On Mon, 20 May 2002 14:24:57 GMT, Busybody Padraig Breathnach
> <padr...@iol.ie> wrote:
>
> [...]
> >In the past Polar was an active participant in AUE. She and Rey had a
> >big falling out. She ceased posting in AUE, except for the occasional
> >item which leaks in because it is crossposted. As she no longer
> >presents an obvious target for Rey's ire, it seems that he feels a
> >need to seek out some of her posts in other groups in order to
> >continue the feud. He likes to let AUE regulars know about this.
>
> [...]
> Thanks for your kind message, Padraig.
And for being such a kind chap, Padraig, if you ever get to Santa
Monica, California -- where Sara Meric Goebbels lives, according to
her posts -- you can expect your grateful 70-year-old pal "Polar" to
get down on her knees, whip out her dentures, and gum your
shrivelled-up little Irish dick.
> A few minor corrections:
>
> I did not leave AUE because of any one individual; rather because
> the style of the NG no longer suited me.
Bullshit! You lying old pig are just trying to save face and have
peddled this lie before. Everyone with brains knows you're lying, you
sick fuck.
FACT is that you moved your crazy ass out of AUE because at least one
female and two male AUE regulars -- all highly intelligent individuals
-- confronted you with facts and questions and ridicule. You refused
to answer even one serious question and told AUE you had to go to bed
instead (being pooped from having posted your usual compulsive 30-70
daily posts).
> I did not have a "falling out" with any one individual.
FACT: You had a "falling out" with *two* individuals. Everyone with
brains knows who those two are. You goddamn lying bitch!
> More than that, I cannot say, since I am under the strictest
> instructions not to make any comment about any individual or
> individuals who might or might not be committing cyber-stalking
> involving slander, libel, and defamation of character.
>
> Matters such as this are usually placed in the hands of the
> competent authorities.
But only by hysterical, paranoid old hags like you and your evil twin,
The Vicious Beast of Berkeley.
> --
> Polar
1. There should be no comma after "More than that"
2. "strictest" instructions sucks, like you.
3. "in the hands of the competent authorities":
of course one wouldn't place such matters in the hands
of *incompetent* authorities, you stupid cunt.
4. Better not invest too much money in your revenge gamble;
there are lots of incompetent authorities out there,
be they Feds or bloodsucking shysters you found through
habitual "shnorring" in legal newsgroups.
Listen, Sara, you crazy cunt, when you forward this post to your
"competent authorities," could you ask them whether you yourself
committed slander, libel, and defamation of character by publicly
accusing *me* of being the author of the anti-Polar post below?
You are not a good client, because you did not obey your competent
authorities' strictest instructions not to make any comment about any
individual who might be committing cyber-stalking involving slander,
libel, and defamation of character -- and then you silly old asshole
fingered me *twice* in a bunch of newsgroups as the author of
anonymous anti-Polar posts, of which I'll reproduce parts below, by
posting the URL of one of my Web pages, namely
< http://www.sonic.net/maledicta/j-accuse.html >,
which is my sarcastic Open Letter to Janet Reno, signed and
copyrighted by me.
You should *listen* to your lawyers, the cops or the Feds, or whomever
you are trying to sic on me à la The Vile Beast from Hell: They *told*
you to shut your fuckin' mouth, but noooooooooo, crazy "Polar" just
*had* to point her finger straight at this here individual, Reinhold
Aman. You can really fuck up your case (har-har) this way, and all
the work your competent authorities put in goes down the toilet
because of your big mouth.
=============================================================
Anyway, here are excerpts to refresh your memory, so that you can ask
your competent authorities whether or not you yourself slandered,
libeled, and defamed my character by naming me as the author of the
following vile anti-Polar post. All the following material is
straight from Google except what I added in curly brackets { }:
All messages are from thread "About Polar <sme...@mindspring.com>"
Message #1 in thread:
--------------------
From: FYI (f...@fyi.fyi)
Subject: About Polar <sme...@mindspring.com>
Newsgroups: rec.travel.air, alt.english.usage,
alt.current-events.wtc-explosion, soc.history, rec.travel.usa-canada,
soc.culture.israel, rec.pets.cats.health+behav
Date: 2002-04-21 13:34:23 PST
Anyone expecting a straight answer from Polar on why she rails against
female genital mutilation but remains conspicuously silent on male
genital mutilation shouldn't hold their breath expecting an answer
from her. She is never going to answer you because to do so would be
to reveal her own hypocrisy, conflict of interests, and hidden agenda.
Polar is the laughing stock of rec.travel.air. She is a demented old
post-menopausal jewish lesbian cow. She likes to lure the little
girls in her Santa Monica neighborhood and play with their little
vaginas and have sex with them. That's why she rages against "female
genital mutilation" but couldn't give a fuck what happens to boys.
She's interested in keeping those little girls' vulvas intact so she
can play with them, fondle them, and eat their little pussies. That's
why she goes into epileptic convulsions raging against female
circumcision but dismisses male circumcision saying it's doesn't
matter because it's not as bad as the female kind. Of course, being a
jew it is in her best interest to play down the sexual rape and abuse
of helpless boys having knives taken to their sexual organs since her
religion has been doing it for millenia.
You can pretty much ignore anything "Polar" says, everybody else does.
Besides her lesbian-induced fgm activism she also likes to post the
most ridiculous, over the top anti-Arab, anti-Muslim rants full of
foaming-at-the-mouth anger and psychotic displays. It's quite funny
to watch her having her periodic meltdowns over whatever is happening
in the middle east. I think she should be impaled on a broomstick and
put up in the middle of the Palestinian territory in the West Bank and
have the Palestinians blow her pussy up with grenades (a nice
circumcision job!) and then blow the rest of the crazy bitch up into a
million pieces.
---------------------------------------------------------------
{ NOTE: The above is what "Polar" claims I posted (see following
message by her), and to all those newsgroups! Irrelevant message #2
snipped. }
Message #3 in thread:
--------------------
From: Polar (sme...@mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: About Polar <sme...@mindspring.com>
Newsgroups: rec.travel.air, alt.english.usage,
alt.current-events.wtc-explosion, soc.history, rec.travel.usa-canada,
soc.culture.israel, rec.pets.cats.health+behav
Date: 2002-04-22 00:04:16 PST
On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 00:32:32 +0400, FYI <f...@fyi.fyi> wrote:
>Anyone expecting a straight answer from Polar
[...]
For identity of FYI, see:
http://www.sonic.net/maledicta/j-accuse.html
--
Polar
---------------------------------------------------------------
{ Above you have proof of Sara Meric's foul accusation. I have asked
that lying bitch at least twice, in NGs, to retract her libel, but
that fuckin' old sow won't. }
{ Snipped irrelevant message #4 by busybodying asshole Mark Wallace
and irrelevant message #5 by some other asshole. }
Message #6 in thread:
---------------------
From: Chris (t...@damn.funny)
Subject: Re: About Polar <sme...@mindspring.com>
Newsgroups: rec.travel.air, alt.english.usage,
alt.current-events.wtc-explosion, soc.history, rec.travel.usa-canada,
soc.culture.israel, rec.pets.cats.health+behav
Date: 2002-04-22 05:06:15 PST
"FYI" <f...@fyi.fyi> wrote in message
news:dl76cucp6u0vua2kj...@fedoroff.su...
> Anyone expecting a straight answer from Polar
{ Snipped repeat of complete post by FYI but left Chris's salient
comments: }
Agree, Polar is a major nutcase.
I'd just like to correct you on one point. She is not just the
laughing
stock of rec.travel.air. Her fame goes much farther afield than
that. She
is the laughing stock in *every* newsgroup she posts in.
Cheers!
--------- End of Message #6 and of Google citation -----------
With best wishes,
--
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
> "Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >"Dr. Reinhold Aman" wrote:
> >>
> >> [Crossposted to <alt.usage.english>]
> >(foul-mouthed tirade against a perfectly reasonable post by
> >"Polar" snipped)
> Evelyn,
>
> A little background might help you to understand Rey's post.
Thanks for butting in, Padraig, but nobody asked you to interpret my
post to Evelyn. If she's too lazy or stupid to do some background
Googling on me, screw her.
With your holier-than-thou attitude you're getting to be a real pain
in the ass. What are you trying to achieve with your goody-two-shoes
persona? Trying to become Irland's Mother Teresa?
> In the past Polar was an active participant in AUE. She and Rey had a
> big falling out.
FACT: That crazy paranoid cunt "Polar" called me a nasty little prick
simply because I used the intra-Jewish code "M.O.T." (Member Of the
Tribe = fellow Jew) in some post. I had never replied to any of her
sucky posts before; thus her mental illness and being a professional
female Jewish victim must have set off her "Jew hater" buzzer. It's
been going downhill ever since, and that sick old fuck is now dragging
the Real World into Cyberworld via "authorities."
> She ceased posting in AUE, except for the occasional
> item which leaks in because it is crossposted. As she no longer
> presents an obvious target for Rey's ire, it seems that he feels a
> need to seek out some of her posts in other groups in order to
> continue the feud. He likes to let AUE regulars know about this.
I also feel the need to kick your saintly arse off your high horse.
> As you will have observed from his vigourous response to your post,
> he does not shy away from dispute.
>
> Let me suggest answers to your questions:
> >A) what does a dispute about correct German usage have to
> >do with ENGLISH usage? (Has no one told you they are two
> >separate languages?)
> His post had nothing to do with English usage. That fact is irrelevant
> to him.
That fact is also irrelevant to your sicko pal "Polar," who posts her
OT shit in any NG she feels like. You seem to have overlooked this
critical point. Not good for a neutral near-saint like you yourself.
> (It might be argued that the saying has now been adopted into
> English, much as phrases like "a priori" or "cul de sac" have been,
> but I think Rey is not, in this context, very interested in any such
> justification.)
Nor is your asshole buddy "Polar," who posts her rants in totally
unjustifiable NGs. Luckily you don't take sides but also mention Sara
Meric Goebbels's insanities; otherwise it would devalue your analysis
of my thinking and m.o.
> >B) You might commence your interest in "English usage" by
> >improving your vocabulary to a degree where you need not
> >resort to foul language to express disagreement with other
> >posters.
> In this regard I would be a hypocrite if I endorsed your criticism of
> him. Rey has a special interest in verbal aggression. It's not
> necessarily bad English, albeit not to the liking of all. That does
> not bother Rey.
The first neutral statement.
> >C) Do you really think personal attacks against the
> >original poster strengthen your own argument?
> The personal attack against the original poster is his argument; the
> material to which he is responding is simply the hook on which he
> hangs it.
Brilliant analysis. And some people consider you a mindless drab old
fart.
> Now that you know this, you can make a better-informed decision about
> continuing your conversation with Rey.
Jesus, are you naive. Someone with a name like "Evelyn Vogt Gamble
(Divamanque)" wouldn't dream of sullying her name by arguing with me.
--
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
M A L E D I C T A
P.O. Box 14123
Santa Rosa, CA 95402, USA
Padraig Breathnach
>And for being such a kind chap, Padraig, if you ever get to Santa
>Monica, California -- where Sara Meric Goebbels lives, according to
>her posts -- you can expect your grateful 70-year-old pal "Polar" to
>get down on her knees, whip out her dentures, and gum your
>shrivelled-up little Irish dick.
>
My "shrivelled-up little Irish dick", indeed! So you were the guy at
the next stall with the apparent fixation. No wonder it shrivelled up.
It has recovered.
PB
Padraig Breathnach
>Busybody Padraig Breathnach wrote:
>
I have qualified for Rey's ire. This is a landmark achievement.
You had better be careful, Rey. If, wherever you look, you see the red
mist rising, you will see nothing else.
>> "Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> >"Dr. Reinhold Aman" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> [Crossposted to <alt.usage.english>]
>
>> >(foul-mouthed tirade against a perfectly reasonable post by
>> >"Polar" snipped)
>
>> Evelyn,
>>
>> A little background might help you to understand Rey's post.
>
>Thanks for butting in, Padraig, but nobody asked you to interpret my
>post to Evelyn. If she's too lazy or stupid to do some background
>Googling on me, screw her.
>
Usenet is a public forum. Nobody asked me not to offer an
interpretation, and nobody is entitled to stop me. You are most
generous in offering interpretations of some of Polar's postings, so
why object if other people offer similar facilities in relation to
some of yours?
>With your holier-than-thou attitude you're getting to be a real pain
>in the ass.
>
Your ass, your pain.
>What are you trying to achieve with your goody-two-shoes
>persona? Trying to become Irland's Mother Teresa?
>
Oh God, no. My aspiration is to set, rather than follow, standards. I
hope to supplant Goody Two-Shoes and Mother Teresa.
>> In the past Polar was an active participant in AUE. She and Rey had a
>> big falling out.
>
>FACT: That crazy paranoid cunt "Polar" called me a nasty little prick
>simply because I used the intra-Jewish code "M.O.T." (Member Of the
>Tribe = fellow Jew) in some post. I had never replied to any of her
>sucky posts before; thus her mental illness and being a professional
>female Jewish victim must have set off her "Jew hater" buzzer. It's
>been going downhill ever since, and that sick old fuck is now dragging
>the Real World into Cyberworld via "authorities."
>
So you confirm that Polar and you had a big falling out.
>> She ceased posting in AUE, except for the occasional
>> item which leaks in because it is crossposted. As she no longer
>> presents an obvious target for Rey's ire, it seems that he feels a
>> need to seek out some of her posts in other groups in order to
>> continue the feud. He likes to let AUE regulars know about this.
>
>I also feel the need to kick your saintly arse off your high horse.
>
Feel free to try.
>> As you will have observed from his vigourous response to your post,
>> he does not shy away from dispute.
>>
>> Let me suggest answers to your questions:
>
>> >A) what does a dispute about correct German usage have to
>> >do with ENGLISH usage? (Has no one told you they are two
>> >separate languages?)
>
>> His post had nothing to do with English usage. That fact is irrelevant
>> to him.
>
>That fact is also irrelevant to your sicko pal "Polar," who posts her
>OT shit in any NG she feels like. You seem to have overlooked this
>critical point. Not good for a neutral near-saint like you yourself.
>
So you don't deny what I said.
>> (It might be argued that the saying has now been adopted into
>> English, much as phrases like "a priori" or "cul de sac" have been,
>> but I think Rey is not, in this context, very interested in any such
>> justification.)
>
>Nor is your asshole buddy "Polar," who posts her rants in totally
>unjustifiable NGs. Luckily you don't take sides but also mention Sara
>Meric Goebbels's insanities; otherwise it would devalue your analysis
>of my thinking and m.o.
>
>> >B) You might commence your interest in "English usage" by
>> >improving your vocabulary to a degree where you need not
>> >resort to foul language to express disagreement with other
>> >posters.
>
>> In this regard I would be a hypocrite if I endorsed your criticism of
>> him. Rey has a special interest in verbal aggression. It's not
>> necessarily bad English, albeit not to the liking of all. That does
>> not bother Rey.
>
>The first neutral statement.
>
I see. You acknowledge that something in honest justification of some
of what you do is neutral. But anything which might be interpreted as
criticism and which does not also include an attack on Polar is,
apparently, not neutral.
>> >C) Do you really think personal attacks against the
>> >original poster strengthen your own argument?
>
>> The personal attack against the original poster is his argument; the
>> material to which he is responding is simply the hook on which he
>> hangs it.
>
>Brilliant analysis. And some people consider you a mindless drab old
>fart.
>
So they might. Do you dispute my analysis?
>> Now that you know this, you can make a better-informed decision about
>> continuing your conversation with Rey.
>
>Jesus, are you naive. Someone with a name like "Evelyn Vogt Gamble
>(Divamanque)" wouldn't dream of sullying her name by arguing with me.
>
That is ad nominem argument.
PB
Simon R. Hughes
I hope you disinfected the hole in the wall before insertion,
Padraig.
Miguel Cruz
>> Jesus, are you naive. Someone with a name like "Evelyn Vogt Gamble
>> (Divamanque)" wouldn't dream of sullying her name by arguing with me.
>
> That is ad nominem argument.
Finally, something to make this subthread worth reading...
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
New mini photo-feature: Life in DC: http://travel.u.nu/dc/
Garry J. Vass
news:oo5keu4c9nr5fnuqa...@4ax.com...
If you two continue on like this, sooner or later you will hurt each other's
feelings. The whole business about Polar and Rey (et al) is in the
archives.
[trimmed to aue only]
Padraig Breathnach
Thanks for the good intentions implicit in your post, Garry.
I doubt if Rey's feelings are in danger of being hurt by me, as I am
not attacking him personally.
I feel that my feelings are safe from Rey's onslaught.
But I am quite happy to desist.
PB
Garry J. Vass
news:t4aieu8r24gnt1cke...@4ax.com...
>
> I did not have a "falling out" with any one individual.
>
> More than that, I cannot say, since I am under the strictest
> instructions not to make any comment about any individual or
> individuals who might or might not be committing cyber-stalking
> involving slander, libel, and defamation of character.
>
Just to introduce a topical note to this thread for anyone sad enough to be
following it (including me), the above paragraphs constitute a working
example of "apophasis". It is an ironic rhetorical device, and is explained
at the aue site, http://www.alt-usage-english.org
Jitze Couperus
Eh?
I see apophasis variously defined as
"The rejection of several reasons why a thing should or should
not be done and affirming a single one, considered most valid"
and
"A figure by which a speaker formally declines to take notice
of a favorable point, but in such a manner as to produce the
effect desired"
both of which seem different from what I read in the FAQ.
Very confusticating. Then trying to see whether the term applies
to the passage cited - even more confusticating. My head hurts.
As an example of the first definition above -
It's not because he's a cad. It's not because he is lazy.
Nor even because of his sanitary habits. Nay - it is because
he is an utter bore that we must reject his membership in
our company.
As an example of the second definition above -
I won't mention his generosity, nor will I mention his
willingness to help at any time. But I must draw your attention
to his remarkable skill as a cook.
The FAQ however tells us "Mentioning something by saying you
aren't going to mention it (e.g., "I won't mention his laziness")
is called "apophasis" or "preterition".
Maybe they are all three the same, but that seems stretching it
a bit.
Jitze
Schainbaum, Robert
Whatever it is, this is a good example: "I need not remind you to get
your Christmas shopping done early."
Mentioning something by saying it won't be mentioned.
Schainbaum, Robert
>
> Whatever it is, this is a good example: "I need not remind you to get
> your Christmas shopping done early."
>
> Mentioning something by saying it won't be mentioned.
Another sweet example: Mary Matlin, the Bush campaign's political
director, made the point with ruthless venom at a press briefing in
Washington, saying, 'The larger issue is that Clinton is evasive and
slick. We have never said to the press that he is a philandering,
pot-smoking, draft-dodger. There's nothing nefarious or subliminal going
on.'"
Mike Oliver
> The FAQ however tells us "Mentioning something by saying you
> aren't going to mention it (e.g., "I won't mention his laziness")
> is called "apophasis" or "preterition".
Was it Isaac Asimov who referred to someone "whose name I won't
mention except to say that it's Harlan Ellison"?
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>"Reinhold (Rey) Aman" <am...@sonic.net> wrote:
Overheard in a pub once:
"Here comes Paddy with his big dick."
--
Charles Riggs
"Shaw has not an enemy in the world; and none of
his friends like him."
Oscar Wilde, 1911
Charles Riggs
<am...@sonic.net> wrote:
> What are you trying to achieve with your goody-two-shoes
>persona?
BrE heard on the tube last night: goody-four-shoes.
Cool, I don't know how either came about.
--
Charles Riggs
"We have everything in common with America nowadays
except, of course, language."
Oscar Wilde, 1887
Padraig Breathnach
>On Tue, 21 May 2002 09:36:25 GMT, "Reinhold (Rey) Aman"
><am...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>> What are you trying to achieve with your goody-two-shoes
>>persona?
>
>BrE heard on the tube last night: goody-four-shoes.
>Cool, I don't know how either came about.
The expression was used to refer to a couple. But it does tempt one to
think "four shoes good, two shoes bad".
PB
Mike Oliver
> The expression was used to refer to a couple. But it does tempt one to
> think "four shoes good, two shoes bad".
We walk on two shoes not on four/to walk on four shoes breaks the law?
--
What happens when we break the law?
What happens when the rules aren't fair?
We all know where we go from there -- to the house of pain!
"No Spill Blood", Oingo Boingo
Simon R. Hughes
Ah, the television. I was wondering where Charles had moved to in
Ireland that had an underground railway system.
Charles M. Strauss
So now we have "preteritio", "apophasis", AND "paraleipsis" all
meaning exactly the same thing?
/cms
Miguel Cruz
> Padraig Breathnach wrote:
>> The expression was used to refer to a couple. But it does tempt one to
>> think "four shoes good, two shoes bad".
>
> We walk on two shoes not on four/to walk on four shoes breaks the law?
Who makes the rules? Someone else!
Don Aitken
wrote:
>
>"Shaw has not an enemy in the world; and none of
>his friends like him."
>Oscar Wilde, 1911
Via ouija board, possibly?
--
Don Aitken
Charles Riggs
wrote:
I see my mistake now: apparently Wilde said it, but the quote was
attributed to a passage in a letter from Shaw to some Archibald
Henderson, in February of 1911.
--
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
Television (AmE: tube, idiot box, but not telly, AFAIK)
--
Charles Riggs
"I read the book of Job last night. I don't think
God comes well out of it."
Virginia Woolf, 1930
Orne Batmagoo
Charles Riggs wrote:
[Re "goody two-shoes".]
> BrE heard on the tube last night: goody-four-shoes.
> Cool, I don't know how either came about.
According to www.quinion.com (a.u.e oldtimers may remember Michael Quinion):
"It comes from the title of a rather twee and moralistic nursery tale called
_The_History_of_Goody_Two-Shoes_, which is thought to have been written by
Oliver Goldsmith, and which was published in 1765 by John Newbery, one of the
earliest London publishers of children's stories. Goody owned only one shoe.
When she was given a pair of them, she was so pleased that she showed them to
everybody, saying "Two shoes". The phrase now refers to a self-righteous,
smugly virtuous person.> --"[1]
"Goody" was a common nickname for married women, way back when; it was
short for "Goodwife". The character's "real" name was Margery Meanwell
(and she lived in Mouldwell).
Googling found the full text, and some pretty illustrations, so read it
if you can stomach it. Tonstant weaders may fwow up.
I was amused to see that Newbery's edition bears the legend: "See the
Original Manuscript in the Vatican at Rome,, and the Cuts by Michael Angelo."
"The Hockliffe Project" at <http://www.cta.dmu.ac.uk/projects/Hockliffe/>
has images of all pages of a later edition than Newbery's, issued by a
different publisher. They also have the images of all the pages of some
other antique children's books.[2]
Amazing what one can find on the web.
--
[1] The material at the web site is copyrighted, but I reckon it's fair use;
I said where I got it from. It's not like I'm making any money here.
In fact, I'm advertising the site, so if anything Quinion should pay me!
[2] "The Hockliffe Project has been designed to promote the study of early
British children's literature. It will provide internet access to the full texts
of the Hockliffe Collection of Early Children's Books, owned by De Montfort
University, and will accompany this archive with contextualising documents and
research. The aim is to work towards a reevaluation of children's literature in
its own infancy, and to let these rich and varied books speak for themselves."
--
Orne Batmagoo
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>[rec.travel.europe removed]
>
>Charles Riggs wrote:
>
>[Re "goody two-shoes".]
>
>> BrE heard on the tube last night: goody-four-shoes.
>> Cool, I don't know how either came about.
>
>According to www.quinion.com (a.u.e oldtimers may remember Michael Quinion):
>
>"It comes from the title of a rather twee and moralistic nursery tale called
>_The_History_of_Goody_Two-Shoes_, which is thought to have been written by
>Oliver Goldsmith, and which was published in 1765 by John Newbery, one of the
>earliest London publishers of children's stories. Goody owned only one shoe.
>When she was given a pair of them, she was so pleased that she showed them to
>everybody, saying "Two shoes". The phrase now refers to a self-righteous,
>smugly virtuous person.> --"[1]
Thanks for the explanation. A certain Irishman comes to mind.
Charles Riggs
Padraig Breathnach
>Thanks for the explanation. A certain Irishman comes to mind.
>
I thought that you had dismissed Mel from your mind.
PB
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>Charles Riggs <chr...@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>>Thanks for the explanation. A certain Irishman comes to mind.
>>
>I thought that you had dismissed Mel from your mind.
Damn it, Padraig, I had until this very moment. He belongs in jail and
never mind the key. Jail the damn dog, wife, and daughter, which all
look much alike, with him, I say.
Charles Riggs
Howie
<chr...@eircom.net> wrote:
|On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 17:04:10 -0500, Orne Batmagoo <rbr...@uwsa.edu>
|wrote:
|
<snip>
|>When she was given a pair of them, she was so pleased that she showed them to
|>everybody, saying "Two shoes". The phrase now refers to a self-righteous,
|>smugly virtuous person.> --"[1]
|
|Thanks for the explanation. A certain Irishman comes to mind.
|
Roy Keane ?
--
Howard Coakley: New Media Consultant.
My messageboard:-
http://cgi.coakley.plus.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi
e-mail... howard<dot}coakleyatbigfoot<dot].com
ICQ:4502837. (Try ICQ at www.icq.com)
Dhughlas Og
a story. She was very poor but remained cheerful and resilient. She had to go
barefooted until one day, through either a gift or rising prosperity, she got
two shoes and exclaimed, "Goody!" As people became earned more money, they
began to forget the hard times of the past and only remembered the exclamation
as an overly sugary piety, rather than an example of fortitude in the face of
hardship.
Donna Richoux
Almost right. The usual sources (Quinion, Morris, etc) turned up by the
AUE Search feature say that "Goody" was the character's name, not what
she said. Here's Evan Morris, The Word Detective:
The original "Goody Two Shoes" wasn't a hypocrite, although she
definitely sounds a bit unbearable to modern ears. She made her
debut in a children's story called "The History of Little Goody
Two-Shoes," published by John Newbery in 1766. Goody was a poor
child who only had one shoe. One day she somehow obtained a
complete pair of shoes, whereupon she ran through the streets of
her neighborhood, accosting passersby at random and announcing "Two
shoes! Two shoes!" The author of this fable, incidentally, is said
to have been the famed English playwright Oliver Goldsmith.
While today we would probably regard Goody
as a hopeless wuss and routinely use
"Goody Two Shoes" to mean someone who is
suspiciously upright, it's comforting to
know that it took us almost 200 years to
arrive at that conclusion, and that the
first negative, cynical use of "Goody Two
Shoes" in print dates back only to 1934.
Searching for a text on-line, I find a copy of the 1766 edition at:
http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~cpercy/courses/457Goody.htm
That shows that the character's name was actually Margery Meanwell. As
Morris said, what she actually cried out was "Two shoes," leaving the
"Goody" unexplained, except as the usual 18th century title, short for
"Goodwife." Women were called "Goody Brown," "Goody Smith," etc.
Here's the relevant text:
CHAP. III.
How Little Margery obtained the Name of Goody
Two-Shoes, and what happened in the Parish.
AS soon as Little Margery got up in the Morning, which was very
early, she ran all round the Village, crying for her Brother; and
after some Time returned greatly distressed. However, at this
Instant, the Shoemaker very opportunely came in with the new Shoes,
for which she had been measured by the Gentleman's Order
Nothing could have supported Little Margery under the Affliction
she was in for the Loss of her Brother, but the Pleasure she took
in her two Shoes. She ran out to Mrs. Smith as soon as they were
put on, and stroking down her ragge d Apron thus, [picture], cried
out, Two Shoes, Mame, see two Shoes. And so she
behaved to all the People she met, and by that Means obtained the
Name of Goody Two-Shoes, though her Playmates called her Old Goody
Two-Shoes.
I just love being able to turn up original texts so easily. Don't even
have to get out of my chair.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
Ben Zimmer
The pejorative use of "goody two-shoes" was no doubt helped along by the
fact that "goody" developed another sense besides "goodwife"-- "goody"
as an adjective came to mean "good in a weak or sentimental way;
addicted to or characterized by inept manifestations of good or pious
sentiment," as the OED has it. The cites for "goody" in this sense
(along with "goodiness", "goodyism", "goodyish", etc.) all come from the
19th century (Coleridge first referred to "goodiness" in an 1810 essay)
and are not connected to the "Two Shoes" story.
Later "goody" also came to mean "a goody person". OED marks the noun as
U.S. colloquial usage, which may be generally true for such phrases as
"goodies and baddies". But of course there was the widely syndicated
'70s BBC comedy "The Goodies"-- although if I'm not mistaken the
singular of "Goodies" was "Goodie". (There's also an Atlanta-based rap
group called The Goodie Mob, but there's no connection to BBC's
Goodies-- their name is an acronym for "The Good Die Mostly Over
Bull...")
--Ben
jan_...@hotmail.com
<bgzi...@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote:
>
>Later "goody" also came to mean "a goody person". OED marks the noun as
>U.S. colloquial usage, which may be generally true for such phrases as
>"goodies and baddies". But of course there was the widely syndicated
>'70s BBC comedy "The Goodies"-- although if I'm not mistaken the
>singular of "Goodies" was "Goodie". (There's also an Atlanta-based rap
>group called The Goodie Mob, but there's no connection to BBC's
>Goodies-- their name is an acronym for "The Good Die Mostly Over
>Bull...")
I have also heard "goody" used as a noun indicating something desirous
such as candy or ice-cream.
Jan Sand
Ben Zimmer
Yes, OED has "goody(-goody)" meaning "a sweetmeat" dating back to 1745
(and "goody" as "a childish exclamation denoting delight, satisfaction,
or surprise" back to 1796).