The fallout from the BBC Angry Queen debacle continues

[Guest I wish I knew how to quit you, Pap]

http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifying-and-correcting-every-lie-in-history-by-decree-of-an-angry-queen-279067.php

 

BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

 

The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Fenton

As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

broadcast by the BBC.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

personally.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

gullible public.

[Guest Jerry Kraus]

On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

<papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin...

>

> BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

>

> The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

> was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

> aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

> as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

> A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

> divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

> an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

>

> -------------------------------------------------------------------

> Dear Fenton

> As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

> past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

> may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> broadcast by the BBC.

> -------------------------------------------------------------------

> If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

> call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

> personally.

> --------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

> humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

> publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

> Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

> that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> gullible public.

 

Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

[Guest 2nz]

On Jul 17, 11:38 am, Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

> Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.- Hide quoted text -

 

How true. I'll never bow to her and she'll never be able to put me in

chains.

[Guest Turenne]

Jerry Kraus wrote:

>Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

 

That would be true if it wasn't for the small matter of The

Commonwealth, of which she is the head. There are 53 member states of

The Commonwealth representing 2,000,000,000 people. Also, may I point

out that she is the Queen of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as

well as England.

 

Richard Lichten

[Guest michael]

Turenne <richard.lichten1@virgin.net> wrote:

>Jerry Kraus wrote:

>

>>Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

>

>That would be true if it wasn't for the small matter of The

>Commonwealth, of which she is the head. There are 53 member states of

>The Commonwealth representing 2,000,000,000 people. Also, may I point

>out that she is the Queen of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as

>well as England.

>

>Richard Lichten

 

And Canada, and Australia, and New Zealand, and . . . . . . .

[Guest the_verminator@comcast.net]

On Jul 17, 12:38 pm, Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

>

>

>

>

>

> <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin...

>

> > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

>

> > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

> > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

> > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

> > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

> > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

> > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

> > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

>

> > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > Dear Fenton

> > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

> > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

> > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > broadcast by the BBC.

> > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

> > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

> > personally.

> > --------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

> > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

> > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

> > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

> > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > gullible public.

>

> Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

 

Except, of course, for the other 16 countries of which she is the Head

of State !

[Guest Turenne]

Jerry Kraus wrote:

>Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

 

There is the little matter of The Commonwealth of which she is the

head. 53 nations with a population of 2 billion.

 

Richard Lichten

[Guest David Johnston]

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 03:05:18 -0700, Turenne

<richard.lichten1@virgin.net> wrote:

>Jerry Kraus wrote:

>

>>Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

>

>There is the little matter of The Commonwealth of which she is the

>head. 53 nations with a population of 2 billion.

 

It's fair to say her influence in the commonwealth is indeed pretty

limited.

[Guest the_verminator@comcast.net]

On Jul 17, 12:38 pm, Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

>

>

>

>

>

> <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin...

>

> > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

>

> > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

> > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

> > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

> > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

> > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

> > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

> > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

>

> > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > Dear Fenton

> > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

> > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

> > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > broadcast by the BBC.

> > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

> > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

> > personally.

> > --------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

> > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

> > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

> > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

> > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > gullible public.

>

> Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

 

Except, of course, for the 16 other countries of which she is Head of

State.

[Guest Turenne]

On 19 Jul, 11:05, Turenne <richard.licht...@virgin.net> wrote:

> Jerry Kraus wrote:

> >Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

>

> There is the little matter of The Commonwealth of which she is the

> head. 53 nations with a population of 2 billion.

>

> Richard Lichten

 

Sorry for repeat, problems with Google Groups, my postings either

don't go through or take a day to do so.

 

Richard

[Guest rc]

On Jul 18, 1:18?pm, 2nz <U.Betcher...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jul 17, 11:38 am, Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>

>

> > Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.- Hide quoted text -

>

> How true. I'll never bow to her and she'll never be able to put me in

> chains.

 

When would you have the opportunity to bow to the Queen and why should

she want to put you in chains? I'm just curious.

 

RC

[Guest the_verminator@comcast.net]

On Jul 19, 1:09 pm, Turenne <richard.licht...@virgin.net> wrote:

> On 19 Jul, 11:05, Turenne <richard.licht...@virgin.net> wrote:

>

> > Jerry Kraus wrote:

> > >Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

>

> > There is the little matter of The Commonwealth of which she is the

> > head. 53 nations with a population of 2 billion.

>

> > Richard Lichten

>

> Sorry for repeat, problems with Google Groups, my postings either

> don't go through or take a day to do so.

>

> Richard

 

I've noticed the same problem with my postings - glad to know it isn't

just me

[Guest Mr Hand]

On Jul 20, 1:52 am, "the_vermina...@comcast.net"

<the_vermina...@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Jul 17, 12:38 pm, Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

> > On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

>

> > <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> > >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin...

>

> > > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

>

> > > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

> > > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

> > > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

> > > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

> > > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

> > > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

> > > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

>

> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > Dear Fenton

> > > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

> > > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

> > > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > > broadcast by the BBC.

> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

> > > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

> > > personally.

> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> > > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

> > > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

> > > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

> > > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

> > > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > > gullible public.

>

> > Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.- Hide quoted text -

>

> > - Show quoted text -

>

> Except, of course, for the 16 other countries of which she is Head of

> State.- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

 

Purely ceremonial Vermy. She has no power here in Australia, legally

of course but not in reality. She really does'nt have asay in who the

Gov.General is. She has to accept whoever the P.M. recommends to her.

 

Hand

[Guest Harold Burton]

In article <1184693935.416744.304090@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,

Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1999@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

> <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> > http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin...

> >

> > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

> >

> > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

> > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

> > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

> > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

> > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

> > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

> > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

> >

> > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > Dear Fenton

> > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

> > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

> > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > broadcast by the BBC.

> > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

> > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

> > personally.

> > --------------------------------------------------------------------

> >

> > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

> > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

> > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

> > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

> > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > gullible public.

>

> Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

 

 

Her influence inside England isn't that great, either.

[Guest the_verminator@comcast.net]

On Jul 19, 10:13 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> In article <1184693935.416744.304...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,

> Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

> > On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

> > <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> > >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin...

>

> > > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

>

> > > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

> > > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

> > > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

> > > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

> > > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

> > > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

> > > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

>

> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > Dear Fenton

> > > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

> > > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

> > > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > > broadcast by the BBC.

> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

> > > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

> > > personally.

> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> > > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

> > > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

> > > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

> > > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

> > > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > > gullible public.

>

> > Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

>

> Her influence inside England isn't that great, either.- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

 

Believe me- anyone who can single handedly bring the government of a

country to a dead stop and a constitutional crisis IS influential in

that country.

[Guest Mr Hand]

On Jul 21, 8:51 am, "the_vermina...@comcast.net"

<the_vermina...@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Jul 19, 10:13 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>

>

>

> > In article <1184693935.416744.304...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,

> > Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

> > > On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

> > > <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> > > >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin...

>

> > > > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > > > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

>

> > > > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

> > > > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

> > > > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

> > > > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

> > > > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > > > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > > > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

> > > > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > > > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

> > > > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

>

> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > Dear Fenton

> > > > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > > > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

> > > > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

> > > > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > > > broadcast by the BBC.

> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

> > > > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > > > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > > > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

> > > > personally.

> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> > > > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > > > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

> > > > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

> > > > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

> > > > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > > > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

> > > > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > > > gullible public.

>

> > > Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

>

> > Her influence inside England isn't that great, either.- Hide quoted text -

>

> > - Show quoted text -

>

> Believe me- anyone who can single handedly bring the government of a

> country to a dead stop and a constitutional crisis IS influential in

> that country.

 

Are you talking about 1975 Australia Vermy ?

 

If so I think the Queen was more embarrassed rather than impressed by

"her" powers.

 

Hand

[Guest Harold Burton]

In article <1184971893.661399.17020@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

"the_verminator@comcast.net" <the_verminator@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Jul 19, 10:13 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > In article <1184693935.416744.304...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,

> > Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > > On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

> > > <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> > > >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin...

> >

> > > > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > > > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

> >

> > > > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

> > > > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

> > > > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

> > > > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

> > > > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > > > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > > > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

> > > > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > > > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

> > > > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

> >

> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > Dear Fenton

> > > > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > > > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

> > > > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

> > > > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > > > broadcast by the BBC.

> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

> > > > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > > > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > > > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

> > > > personally.

> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------

> >

> > > > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > > > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

> > > > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

> > > > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

> > > > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > > > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

> > > > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > > > gullible public.

> >

> > > Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

> >

> > Her influence inside England isn't that great, either.- Hide quoted text -

> >

> > - Show quoted text -

>

> Believe me- anyone who can single handedly bring the government of a

> country to a dead stop and a constitutional crisis IS influential in

> that country.

 

But she can't, so your comment is totally irrelevant.

 

Try again.

[Guest the_verminator@comcast.net]

On Jul 20, 6:01 pm, Mr Hand <pleyl...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> On Jul 21, 8:51 am, "the_vermina...@comcast.net"

>

>

>

>

>

> <the_vermina...@comcast.net> wrote:

> > On Jul 19, 10:13 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>

> > > In article <1184693935.416744.304...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,

> > > Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

> > > > On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

> > > > <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> > > > >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin...

>

> > > > > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > > > > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

>

> > > > > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

> > > > > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

> > > > > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

> > > > > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

> > > > > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > > > > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > > > > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

> > > > > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > > > > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

> > > > > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

>

> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > > Dear Fenton

> > > > > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > > > > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

> > > > > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

> > > > > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > > > > broadcast by the BBC.

> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

> > > > > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > > > > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > > > > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

> > > > > personally.

> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> > > > > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > > > > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

> > > > > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

> > > > > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

> > > > > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > > > > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

> > > > > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > > > > gullible public.

>

> > > > Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

>

> > > Her influence inside England isn't that great, either.- Hide quoted text -

>

> > > - Show quoted text -

>

> > Believe me- anyone who can single handedly bring the government of a

> > country to a dead stop and a constitutional crisis IS influential in

> > that country.

>

> Are you talking about 1975 Australia Vermy ?

>

> If so I think the Queen was more embarrassed rather than impressed by

> "her" powers.

>

> Hand- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

 

Actually, I was thinking of Great Britain. With a wave of her hand she

can dismiss Parliament. Granted that there would be consequences in

doing so but she does have that power... and that makes her

influential.

[Guest Harold Burton]

In article <1184980320.460914.112110@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,

"the_verminator@comcast.net" <the_verminator@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Jul 20, 6:01 pm, Mr Hand <pleyl...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> > On Jul 21, 8:51 am, "the_vermina...@comcast.net"

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > <the_vermina...@comcast.net> wrote:

> > > On Jul 19, 10:13 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >

> > > > In article <1184693935.416744.304...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,

> > > > Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >

> > > > > On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

> > > > > <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> > > > > >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin

> > > > > >...

> >

> > > > > > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > > > > > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

> >

> > > > > > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the

> > > > > > BBC

> > > > > > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the

> > > > > > Planet,

> > > > > > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it

> > > > > > seem

> > > > > > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie

> > > > > > Leibovitz.

> > > > > > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > > > > > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > > > > > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > > > > > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey

> > > > > > reprints

> > > > > > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

> >

> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > > > Dear Fenton

> > > > > > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > > > > > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if

> > > > > > they

> > > > > > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > > > > > broadcast by the BBC.

> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > > > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > > > > > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > > > > > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any

> > > > > > way

> > > > > > personally.

> > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------

> >

> > > > > > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > > > > > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so

> > > > > > incense

> > > > > > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > > > > > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to

> > > > > > assure

> > > > > > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > > > > > gullible public.

> >

> > > > > Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

> >

> > > > Her influence inside England isn't that great, either.- Hide quoted

> > > > text -

> >

> > > > - Show quoted text -

> >

> > > Believe me- anyone who can single handedly bring the government of a

> > > country to a dead stop and a constitutional crisis IS influential in

> > > that country.

> >

> > Are you talking about 1975 Australia Vermy ?

> >

> > If so I think the Queen was more embarrassed rather than impressed by

> > "her" powers.

> >

> > Hand- Hide quoted text -

> >

> > - Show quoted text -

>

> Actually, I was thinking of Great Britain. With a wave of her hand she

> can dismiss Parliament. Granted that there would be consequences in

> doing so...

 

 

LIke if she pisses them off enough they can Impoverish her. Some power.

[Guest the_verminator@comcast.net]

On Jul 20, 7:51 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> In article <1184971893.661399.17...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

>

>

>

>

>

> "the_vermina...@comcast.net" <the_vermina...@comcast.net> wrote:

> > On Jul 19, 10:13 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > In article <1184693935.416744.304...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,

> > > Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

> > > > On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

> > > > <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> > > > >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin...

>

> > > > > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > > > > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

>

> > > > > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the BBC

> > > > > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the Planet,

> > > > > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it seem

> > > > > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie Leibovitz.

> > > > > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > > > > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > > > > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even the

> > > > > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > > > > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey reprints

> > > > > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

>

> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > > Dear Fenton

> > > > > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > > > > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over the

> > > > > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if they

> > > > > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > > > > broadcast by the BBC.

> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free to

> > > > > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > > > > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > > > > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any way

> > > > > personally.

> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> > > > > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > > > > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered and

> > > > > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly and

> > > > > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so incense

> > > > > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > > > > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to assure

> > > > > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > > > > gullible public.

>

> > > > Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

>

> > > Her influence inside England isn't that great, either.- Hide quoted text -

>

> > > - Show quoted text -

>

> > Believe me- anyone who can single handedly bring the government of a

> > country to a dead stop and a constitutional crisis IS influential in

> > that country.

>

> But she can't, so your comment is totally irrelevant.

>

> Try again.- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

 

Actually, she can.

She, and no one else, has the power to both call parliament and

dissolve it.

 

It may well cost her the crown but she does have that power.

[Guest Harold Burton]

In article <1184984959.944226.149210@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,

"the_verminator@comcast.net" <the_verminator@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Jul 20, 7:51 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > In article <1184971893.661399.17...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > "the_vermina...@comcast.net" <the_vermina...@comcast.net> wrote:

> > > On Jul 19, 10:13 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > In article <1184693935.416744.304...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,

> > > > Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >

> > > > > On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

> > > > > <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> > > > > >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin

> > > > > >...

> >

> > > > > > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > > > > > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

> >

> > > > > > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the

> > > > > > BBC

> > > > > > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the

> > > > > > Planet,

> > > > > > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it

> > > > > > seem

> > > > > > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie

> > > > > > Leibovitz.

> > > > > > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > > > > > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > > > > > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > > > > > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey

> > > > > > reprints

> > > > > > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

> >

> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > > > Dear Fenton

> > > > > > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > > > > > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if

> > > > > > they

> > > > > > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > > > > > broadcast by the BBC.

> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > > > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > > > > > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > > > > > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any

> > > > > > way

> > > > > > personally.

> > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------

> >

> > > > > > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > > > > > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so

> > > > > > incense

> > > > > > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > > > > > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to

> > > > > > assure

> > > > > > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > > > > > gullible public.

> >

> > > > > Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

> >

> > > > Her influence inside England isn't that great, either.- Hide quoted

> > > > text -

> >

> > > > - Show quoted text -

> >

> > > Believe me- anyone who can single handedly bring the government of a

> > > country to a dead stop and a constitutional crisis IS influential in

> > > that country.

> >

> > But she can't, so your comment is totally irrelevant.

> >

> > Try again.- Hide quoted text -

> >

> > - Show quoted text -

>

> Actually, she can.

> She, and no one else, has the power to both call parliament and

> dissolve it.

>

> It may well cost her the crown but she does have that power.

 

Some power, if she uses it she likely loses her crown, so for all

intents and purposes she doesn't have the power.

[Guest the_verminator@comcast.net]

On Jul 21, 6:25 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> In article <1184984959.944226.149...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,

>

>

>

>

>

> "the_vermina...@comcast.net" <the_vermina...@comcast.net> wrote:

> > On Jul 20, 7:51 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > In article <1184971893.661399.17...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

>

> > > "the_vermina...@comcast.net" <the_vermina...@comcast.net> wrote:

> > > > On Jul 19, 10:13 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > In article <1184693935.416744.304...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,

> > > > > Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

> > > > > > On Jul 17, 7:41 am, "I wish I knew how to quit you, Papi!"

> > > > > > <papi.iwishik...@howtoquit.you> wrote:

> > > > > > >http://defamer.com/hollywood/royal-audits/bbc-sentenced-to-identifyin

> > > > > > >...

>

> > > > > > > BBC SENTENCED TO IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING EVERY LIE IN HISTORY BY

> > > > > > > DECREE OF AN ANGRY QUEEN

>

> > > > > > > The fallout continues from last week's royal debacle, in which the

> > > > > > > BBC

> > > > > > > was forced to publicly apologize to The Scariest Lady on the

> > > > > > > Planet,

> > > > > > > aka Queen Elizabeth II, for having rearranged footage to make it

> > > > > > > seem

> > > > > > > as though she had stormed out of a photo session with Annie

> > > > > > > Leibovitz.

> > > > > > > A Year with the Queen producers RDF Media e-mailed the

> > > > > > > director-general of the BBC, accepting full responsibility for what

> > > > > > > they refer to as "a serious error of judgment." Somehow, not even

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > divvying of blame among sub-production entities has done much to

> > > > > > > lessen the Queen's wrath, as The WOW Report's Fenton Bailey

> > > > > > > reprints

> > > > > > > an e-mail he received from a BBC contact:

>

> > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > > > > Dear Fenton

> > > > > > > As a result of the BBC/RDF Queen misrepresentation, myself and a

> > > > > > > number of other Execs are having to contact all our suppliers over

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > past 3 years to review our output. To sum up, this is to see if

> > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > may have in any way misled the viewer with anything that has been

> > > > > > > broadcast by the BBC.

> > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > > > > If you feel there is anything you wish to discuss, please feel free

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > call me. It will not in any way be held against you, but we've been

> > > > > > > asked to make these calls to everyone, just to be on the safe side.

> > > > > > > Sorry for having to send this out, and please do not take it any

> > > > > > > way

> > > > > > > personally.

> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> > > > > > > Let that be a lesson to anyone else who might be harboring similar

> > > > > > > plans to use an Avid bay to paint a caricature of an ill-tempered

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > humorless Queen of England: Not only will you have to repeatedly

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > publicly apologize for the trickery, but the gesture will so

> > > > > > > incense

> > > > > > > Her Majesty, she'll order a massive audit of every hour of TV

> > > > > > > broadcast by your network for the past three years, in order to

> > > > > > > assure

> > > > > > > that similar factual discrepancies might not have also deceived a

> > > > > > > gullible public.

>

> > > > > > Her influence outside of England is pretty limited.

>

> > > > > Her influence inside England isn't that great, either.- Hide quoted

> > > > > text -

>

> > > > > - Show quoted text -

>

> > > > Believe me- anyone who can single handedly bring the government of a

> > > > country to a dead stop and a constitutional crisis IS influential in

> > > > that country.

>

> > > But she can't, so your comment is totally irrelevant.

>

> > > Try again.- Hide quoted text -

>

> > > - Show quoted text -

>

> > Actually, she can.

> > She, and no one else, has the power to both call parliament and

> > dissolve it.

>

> > It may well cost her the crown but she does have that power.

>

> Some power, if she uses it she likely loses her crown, so for all

> intents and purposes she doesn't have the power.- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

 

You misunderstand... until she loses her crown she does indeed have

the power; regardless of the consequences the use of said power may

bring.

[Guest NicholasIII@gmail.com]

On Jul 18, 6:24 pm, michael <saygood...@toallthe.spam> wrote:

> > Actually, she can.

> > She, and no one else, has the power to both call parliament and

> > dissolve it.

>

> > It may well cost her the crown but she does have that power.

>

> Some power, if she uses it she likely loses her crown, so for all

> intents and purposes she doesn't have the power.

 

You're mistaking power with influence. Which is not surprising,

because Vermie is pretty much doing the same thing.

 

She has a lot of influence. That's also known as "Soft Power," and is

very useful because if you have enough of it you don't need to shoot

people. As we Americans are finding in Iraq, BTW.

 

Think about it --

She has so much influence that the leaders of Australia got together

and wanted to replace her. But they needed to hold a huge referendum,

because all the power of Parliament could not unilaterally fire the

Queen. And they lost. They think they were right, they have the power,

but won't try again until Elizabeth II dies. Because power loses

elections to stubborn, stern, old ladies. Even when those old ladies

spend almost all their time literally on the opposite side of the

world.

 

She has this power mostly because she only acts when she has to. She's

not in politics to push an agenda, she's there to help make things run

smooth. A PM can't govern she calls an election. If he can govern she

lets him do it. She certainly does not make her political positions

known, or support any party in Parliament. All the other politicos

have grandiose visions for the future, which they push relentlessly.

 

Honestly, as an American I frequently wish our Head-of-State was not

involved in day-to-day politics. Clinton's big political spat seems

tame compared to the spats DC has right now.

 

Nick

[Guest NicholasIII@gmail.com]

On Jul 19, 6:05 am, Turenne <richard.licht...@virgin.net> wrote:

>

> Stuff 'n' nonsense. The reason why the referendum was necessary is

> because the Australian constitution requires it.

 

The Australian Constitution also requires the Queen to agree with damn

near everything the PM does. If obeying the Constitution is power the

PM clearly doesn't have any, because the Queen can fire him at will.

And could probably have him executed tomorrow, without trial, because

replacing the monarchy is treason against the monarch by definition.

 

Note that actual powerful people don't bother with the Constitution. A

Constitution is a bunch of rules, with a grand-sounding name. Since

power makes the rules the truly powerful do not obey Constitutions.

> And the Queen's supposed influence had nothing to do with why most

> Australians in favour of a republic are so, any more than why the

> peoples of South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, Pakistan, India,

> Sri Lanka, Malta, Nigeria, and wherever else voted for one.

 

Uhh...

 

Australia is a country that was built by the British, for British

settlers. Elizabeth is the British Queen. Of the nations you mention

the only one with a significant British population is South Africa,

and they're a minority.

 

Nick