"Gunner" <gunner@NOSPAM.lightspeed.net> wrote in message
news:q1ktj3pcmamk2mfhmki898r7hiodvs3umd@4ax.com...
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 23:37:13 -0000, "Grimly Fiendish"
Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote:


"Gunner" <gunner@NOSPAM.lightspeed.net> wrote in message
news:dfuqj31vpkf9g95j1jc93smh5qk24spd73@4ax.com...
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:26:39 -0000, "Grimly Fiendish"
Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote:


"Gunner Asch" <gunner@NOSPAM.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:d8fkj3p0l0ge1idhqnvrgdlfp549iibu80@4ax.com...
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:46:18 -0000, "Grimly Fiendish"
Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote:


Oh and i guess conniption must be another twisting of English by
the
US
as it's not in the old English dictionary, only the modern ones
that
include US spellings and words, it's also described as "origin
unknown"
but we all know where it came from really don't we ?


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conniption

But - since you only care about the "old" English dictionary, I
guess
you
have no place in modern society.

You have no place on the planet.

As has been said 'oft of you (old English, btw) - you're an
arsehole -
and the more you say, the more you prove it.

Say something fuck face ?


Now roll up your rug boy...and creep off into the woodwork. You have
been spanked repeatedly and are now reverting to really pathetic
replies and 3rd grade repartee.

Pathetic..no wonder the US doesnt want to acknowledge they own the
UK...pimples like you have given it such a bad reputation.


You get back under your rock, or should that be shitrock ?

Looks like the pissant is suddenly realizing he is owned by the
US..and he isnt happy about it.

Tough

Deal with it, serf

Gunner

Haven't you shot yourself yet ?


Why would I? I am quite comfortable being part owner of the UK and
the 65 million serfs that we now own.

Gunner

You own naff all, except a big head.

Grimly Fiendish wrote:


"You" <You@shadow.orgs> wrote in message
news:You-5925BA.09230217112007@netnews.worldnet.att.net...

In article <amprj3pleuuvq1cv50bqfjnr1h1l5kibb2@4ax.com>,
Gunner <gunner@NOSPAM.lightspeed.net> wrote:

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 23:02:41 +0000 (UTC), alvinj@Example.com wrote:

In sci.engr.metallurgy Grimly Fiendish wrote:
..."educate" us all in just "HOW" C4 will ignite your imfamous
"Thermate" as it is scattered around the "Blast Area" by the
detonation of the C4.
I found the above out by using google, i don't know what C$ is...

Take it you meant C4 there?
You don't know what C4 is? :/
How old are you GF? :/

Ok guys, is C4 another 'mercan "brand name" not known to Brits? ;)

From my childhood now... I remember the Brits called it "Cyclonite"
and the Yankees called it RDX and mixed it with something to make it
moldable like moldling clay (plastic).

RDX isnt C-4. Different chemistry, differnt propagation rates

Gunner


C-4 is a Military mixture who's main component is RDX, with some other
Energetic Materials, and a Plasticizer, mixed to make it mauluable.

Cyclonite is the american name for RDX, and is used bacause it is
cheap to make, because the precursers are Petrochemical byproducts,
and it has significant Power Density when compared with other
Energetics, in the same class. RDX also has a well defined Entropy
Knee, which makes it very stable, mechanicaly, and chemicaly. This
makes it a very safe Energetic, which requires less training to use,
than other Energetics in its Power Density class. NO Cap and Booster,
No Boom.....


Fucking hell, i didn't realise so many Americans studied explosives, is
it part of the school curriculum ?

No, we're just far smarter and much more versatile and well-rounded than
you. Our desire for learning doesn't stop at bad urban english, and
you've done "naff all" to prove otherwise.

Yes whilst American English is an attempt to be different.

Ignorant ass. American English is a polyglot language as is British
English. Just because it evolved differently over the last 500 years
doesn't make American English an "attempt" to be different.


We gave you English and you wanted to be different as you had no identity of
your own.

On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 18:22:50 GMT, You <You@shadow.orgs> wrote:

In article <amprj3pleuuvq1cv50bqfjnr1h1l5kibb2@4ax.com>,
Gunner <gunner@NOSPAM.lightspeed.net> wrote:

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 23:02:41 +0000 (UTC), alvinj@Example.com wrote:

In sci.engr.metallurgy Grimly Fiendish wrote:
..."educate" us all in just "HOW" C4 will ignite your imfamous
"Thermate" as it is scattered around the "Blast Area" by the
detonation of the C4.
I found the above out by using google, i don't know what C$ is...

Take it you meant C4 there?
You don't know what C4 is? :/
How old are you GF? :/

Ok guys, is C4 another 'mercan "brand name" not known to Brits? ;)

From my childhood now... I remember the Brits called it "Cyclonite"
and the Yankees called it RDX and mixed it with something to make it
moldable like moldling clay (plastic).

RDX isnt C-4. Different chemistry, differnt propagation rates

Gunner

C-4 is a Military mixture who's main component is RDX, with some other
Energetic Materials, and a Plasticizer, mixed to make it mauluable.

Cyclonite is the american name for RDX, and is used bacause it is
cheap to make, because the precursers are Petrochemical byproducts,
and it has significant Power Density when compared with other
Energetics, in the same class. RDX also has a well defined Entropy
Knee, which makes it very stable, mechanicaly, and chemicaly. This
makes it a very safe Energetic, which requires less training to use,
than other Energetics in its Power Density class. NO Cap and Booster,
No Boom.....

You are absolutely correct. I was thinking about Comp-B. Mea culpa.

Gunner



"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

"Gunner Asch" <gunner@NOSPAM.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:b201k3tko2bmhh332nkofen9em49hu1q15@4ax.com...
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 18:22:50 GMT, You <You@shadow.orgs> wrote:

In article <amprj3pleuuvq1cv50bqfjnr1h1l5kibb2@4ax.com>,
Gunner <gunner@NOSPAM.lightspeed.net> wrote:

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 23:02:41 +0000 (UTC), alvinj@Example.com wrote:

In sci.engr.metallurgy Grimly Fiendish wrote:
..."educate" us all in just "HOW" C4 will ignite your imfamous
"Thermate" as it is scattered around the "Blast Area" by the
detonation of the C4.
I found the above out by using google, i don't know what C$ is...

Take it you meant C4 there?
You don't know what C4 is? :/
How old are you GF? :/

Ok guys, is C4 another 'mercan "brand name" not known to Brits? ;)

From my childhood now... I remember the Brits called it "Cyclonite"
and the Yankees called it RDX and mixed it with something to make it
moldable like moldling clay (plastic).

RDX isnt C-4. Different chemistry, differnt propagation rates

Gunner

C-4 is a Military mixture who's main component is RDX, with some other
Energetic Materials, and a Plasticizer, mixed to make it mauluable.

Cyclonite is the american name for RDX, and is used bacause it is
cheap to make, because the precursers are Petrochemical byproducts,
and it has significant Power Density when compared with other
Energetics, in the same class. RDX also has a well defined Entropy
Knee, which makes it very stable, mechanicaly, and chemicaly. This
makes it a very safe Energetic, which requires less training to use,
than other Energetics in its Power Density class. NO Cap and Booster,
No Boom.....

You are absolutely correct. I was thinking about Comp-B. Mea culpa.


RDX plus TNT there you have your Composition B.

Grimly Fiendish wrote:

"bob" <bob@sss.net> wrote in message
news:bP-dnSsE49pVyKDanZ2dnUVZ_q7inZ2d@comcast.com...

Grimly Fiendish wrote:


"Scott M. Kozel" <kozelsm@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:473BB8A2.6C56FEE@comcast.net...

"Grimly Fiendish" <Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote:


"Scott M. Kozel" <kozelsm@comcast.net> wrote
bob <bob@sss.net> wrote:
Grimly Fiendish wrote:
"bob" <bob@sss.net> wrote

Hey dipshit - I was talking about the term "conniption fit" -
we
already know that you don't know what sheetrock is (and,
actually,
since it is US and Canadian vernacular due to our local
industries,
why would a rube like you know what it is?)

Quite, wassock.

But - reading and understanding context should certainly have
been
part of your massive education in English grammar - I guess
you >> >> were
napping through that part, right?

No, GF was having a conniption fit during that part! :-]

"Built using sheetrock" has no context that can possibly
indicate >> > what
sheetrock is other than it is something used in construction
you >> > thick
twat !!
Just as "My house is built with blue circle" has not.

Oh and i guess conniption must be another twisting of English by
the >> > US
as it's not in the old English dictionary, only the modern ones
that
include US spellings and words, it's also described as "origin
unknown"
but we all know where it came from really don't we ?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conniption

But - since you only care about the "old" English dictionary, I
guess
you have no place in modern society. As has been said 'oft of
you >> (old
English, btw) - you're an arsehole - and the more you say, the
more >> you
prove it.

So GF is using the "old" English dictionary of 1611??
No wonder his understanding of the English language
is so out of date!!

Americans don't speak English they merely abuse and change it.



No, its the Brits who do that! :-)


Obviuosly you know nothing of the history of America and why Enlish is
spoken at all, we wooped you !!!


??? Who "wooped" whom? Please - tell us your version of the history of
"America".


Oh come on, half of Americans came from England, we colonised that land :
http://uk.geocities.com/haywardlass/

"The established inhabitants were swept aside, their lands seized."


You really are an idiot. Besides forgetting about the French, the
Spanish, the Portugeuse, the Norse, the Celts and the Asians who also came
here at various times to colonise this continent - just exactly whom do
you think you are talking to relative to who wooped whom?

Before our Declaration of Independence in 1776, we were British here - or
maybe you didn't know that? When it was decided that we could no longer
take the crap that you were heaping on your own people, enough was enough,
and we kicked your butts with help from the French, who also hated you. I
guess you haven't gotten that far in your intro to western civilization
class?

"Grimly Fiendish" <Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote in message
news:473f662a$0$47138$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...

"Don T." <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:13juhrdmaq6id20@corp.supernews.com...

"Grimly Fiendish" <Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote in message
news:473f418d$0$47129$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...

"Don T." <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:13ju0h8lcmp35d2@corp.supernews.com...
"Grimly Fiendish" <Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote in message
news:473ef8d0$0$47127$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Martin H. Eastburn" <lionslair@consolidated.net> wrote in message
news:1195260418_389@sp6iad.superfeed.net...
Old English began a long time ago. A very long time ago in human
time.

Yes before the roman invasion.

The Romans ruled the roost and made forts and gave forth their
language.

That doesn't make Latin English
http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/arl_latin_language.htm

The Catholic religion the country was beneath was in Latin.
Schooling
in those days were in mostly Latin. When they were finally run out
and
left, what was left. Scottish and Latin and some local words for
jargon.

The Indo-European language tree for Modern English is thus:

Germanic --> Western Germanic --> Low German --> Anglo-Saxon (Old
English)
Thence: from Anglo-Saxon --> Middle English (what most think of old
English)
then to Modern English.

The Dutch were Old Saxon replacing Anglo-Saxon --> Middle Low
German - Plattdeutsch.

Remember in the days of old Kings and Queens were family members all
across
Europe and even Russia.

Anglo-Saxon was a mixture of Low German, Latin, and the common and
in-common
language of the Anglos and those from Saxony - And the French
language came from Latin. So Saxony was mixed with Latin as well as
the local common and religion
based words.


Yes whilst American English is an attempt to be different.

Ignorant ass. American English is a polyglot language as is British
English. Just because it evolved differently over the last 500 years
doesn't make American English an "attempt" to be different.


We gave you English and you wanted to be different as you had no
identity of your own.

You "gave" us nothing. We TOOK your english, your froggish, your
spanish, your scandihoovian, your russian, your yiddish, your chinese,
your japanese, your whatever else and formed the base for American
English. We fought a war and kicked your silly red-coated asses back to
limeyland because we intended and accomplished the right to personal
self ownership. In your case you are a subject. If the queen tells the
headsman to put your silly head on a pike and display it in front of
Buckingham Palace there is NOTHING you can do but run.


Ah that must be that American dream thing you bunch of cock munchers keep
going on about, but dreams aren't real you know.

Poor impotent bastard. I feel sorry for the likes of you.

Grimly Fiendish wrote:


"Don T." <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:13juhrdmaq6id20@corp.supernews.com...


"Grimly Fiendish" <Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote in message
news:473f418d$0$47129$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...


"Don T." <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:13ju0h8lcmp35d2@corp.supernews.com...

"Grimly Fiendish" <Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote in message
news:473ef8d0$0$47127$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...

"Martin H. Eastburn" <lionslair@consolidated.net> wrote in message
news:1195260418_389@sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Old English began a long time ago. A very long time ago in human
time.


Yes before the roman invasion.

The Romans ruled the roost and made forts and gave forth their
language.


That doesn't make Latin English
http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/arl_latin_language.htm

The Catholic religion the country was beneath was in Latin.
Schooling
in those days were in mostly Latin. When they were finally run out
and
left, what was left. Scottish and Latin and some local words for
jargon.

The Indo-European language tree for Modern English is thus:

Germanic --> Western Germanic --> Low German --> Anglo-Saxon (Old
English)
Thence: from Anglo-Saxon --> Middle English (what most think of old
English)
then to Modern English.

The Dutch were Old Saxon replacing Anglo-Saxon --> Middle Low
German - Plattdeutsch.

Remember in the days of old Kings and Queens were family members all
across
Europe and even Russia.

Anglo-Saxon was a mixture of Low German, Latin, and the common and
in-common
language of the Anglos and those from Saxony - And the French
language came from Latin. So Saxony was mixed with Latin as well as
the local common and religion
based words.


Yes whilst American English is an attempt to be different.


Ignorant ass. American English is a polyglot language as is British
English. Just because it evolved differently over the last 500 years
doesn't make American English an "attempt" to be different.


We gave you English and you wanted to be different as you had no
identity of your own.


You "gave" us nothing. We TOOK your english, your froggish, your
spanish, your scandihoovian, your russian, your yiddish, your chinese,
your japanese, your whatever else and formed the base for American
English. We fought a war and kicked your silly red-coated asses back to
limeyland because we intended and accomplished the right to personal
self ownership. In your case you are a subject. If the queen tells the
headsman to put your silly head on a pike and display it in front of
Buckingham Palace there is NOTHING you can do but run.


Ah that must be that American dream thing you bunch of cock munchers keep
going on about, but dreams aren't real you know.

So tell us about the British Dream - or has it now become the dhimmi
dream?

Grimly Fiendish wrote:

"Don T." <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:13ju0h8lcmp35d2@corp.supernews.com...
"Grimly Fiendish" <Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote in message
news:473ef8d0$0$47127$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...

snipped


Yes whilst American English is an attempt to be different.

Ignorant ass. American English is a polyglot language as is British
English. Just because it evolved differently over the last 500 years
doesn't make American English an "attempt" to be different.


We gave you English and you wanted to be different as you had no identity
of your own.


The *American identity* was formed between 1607 and 1775 when the
colonists were subjects of the Crown. The language was the same on
both sides of the Atlantic.

In article <1195337550_549@sp6iad.superfeed.net>,
strabo <strabo@flashlight.net> wrote:
Grimly Fiendish wrote:

"Don T." <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:13ju0h8lcmp35d2@corp.supernews.com...
"Grimly Fiendish" <Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote in message
news:473ef8d0$0$47127$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...

snipped


Yes whilst American English is an attempt to be different.

Ignorant ass. American English is a polyglot language as is British
English. Just because it evolved differently over the last 500 years
doesn't make American English an "attempt" to be different.


We gave you English and you wanted to be different as you had no
identity of your own.


The *American identity* was formed between 1607 and 1775 when the



The idea that there is such a thing as an "American identity" and it
is what you assert it makes my skin crawl.

Al Dykes wrote:

In article <1195337550_549@sp6iad.superfeed.net>,
strabo <strabo@flashlight.net> wrote:

Grimly Fiendish wrote:

"Don T." <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:13ju0h8lcmp35d2@corp.supernews.com...

"Grimly Fiendish" <Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote in message
news:473ef8d0$0$47127$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...

snipped

Yes whilst American English is an attempt to be different.

Ignorant ass. American English is a polyglot language as is British
English. Just because it evolved differently over the last 500 years
doesn't make American English an "attempt" to be different.


We gave you English and you wanted to be different as you had no
identity of your own.


The *American identity* was formed between 1607 and 1775 when the




The idea that there is such a thing as an "American identity" and it
is what you assert it makes my skin crawl.



Nice. Put it YouTube. The Brits love to watch torture

Actually the language differed during that time between 16xx and 1775.
We had trees the Brits didn't we had fish, we had and had more diversity
and the like. We built a local language based on the new stuff on our
turf. While the Brits stuck to an ever dated getting like a dead
language.
Oxford kept it up. They are in general unwilling to just ad a wily-nilly
name in it. Yes I have an Oxford dictionary and know what I speak.

Grimly Fiendish wrote:


"Don T." <-painter-@louvre.org> wrote in message
news:13ju0h8lcmp35d2@corp.supernews.com...

"Grimly Fiendish" <Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote in message
news:473ef8d0$0$47127$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...

"Martin H. Eastburn" <lionslair@consolidated.net> wrote in message
news:1195260418_389@sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Old English began a long time ago. A very long time ago in human time.


Yes before the roman invasion.

The Romans ruled the roost and made forts and gave forth their
language.


That doesn't make Latin English
http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/arl_latin_language.htm

The Catholic religion the country was beneath was in Latin. Schooling
in those days were in mostly Latin. When they were finally run out
and
left, what was left. Scottish and Latin and some local words for
jargon.

The Indo-European language tree for Modern English is thus:

Germanic --> Western Germanic --> Low German --> Anglo-Saxon (Old
English)
Thence: from Anglo-Saxon --> Middle English (what most think of old
English)
then to Modern English.

The Dutch were Old Saxon replacing Anglo-Saxon --> Middle Low German -
Plattdeutsch.

Remember in the days of old Kings and Queens were family members all
across
Europe and even Russia.

Anglo-Saxon was a mixture of Low German, Latin, and the common and
in-common
language of the Anglos and those from Saxony - And the French language
came from Latin. So Saxony was mixed with Latin as well as the local
common and religion
based words.


Yes whilst American English is an attempt to be different.


Ignorant ass. American English is a polyglot language as is British
English. Just because it evolved differently over the last 500 years
doesn't make American English an "attempt" to be different.


We gave you English and you wanted to be different as you had no identity
of your own.

We had to be different, since we started out as YOU, and that was totally
unacceptable. Look where you ended up.

On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 19:31:24 -0000, "Grimly Fiendish"
Alien@Sexfiend.fsnot.co.youK> wrote:


Yes whilst American English is an attempt to be different.

Ignorant ass. American English is a polyglot language as is British
English. Just because it evolved differently over the last 500 years
doesn't make American English an "attempt" to be different.


We gave you English and you wanted to be different as you had no identity
of
your own.

No identity? We are/were "Americans". You are/were "the fucking
bloody British"

Snicker..you still cant get over the fact we own you.

You really need to work on that issue.

Gunner

Grimly Fiendish wrote:

"Martin H. Eastburn" <lionslair@consolidated.net> wrote in message
news:1195260418_389@sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Old English began a long time ago. A very long time ago in human time.


Yes before the roman invasion.

The Romans ruled the roost and made forts and gave forth their language.


That doesn't make Latin English
http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk/arl_latin_language.htm

The Catholic religion the country was beneath was in Latin. Schooling
in those days were in mostly Latin. When they were finally run out and
left, what was left. Scottish and Latin and some local words for
jargon.

The Indo-European language tree for Modern English is thus:

Germanic --> Western Germanic --> Low German --> Anglo-Saxon (Old
English)
Thence: from Anglo-Saxon --> Middle English (what most think of old
English)
then to Modern English.

The Dutch were Old Saxon replacing Anglo-Saxon --> Middle Low German -
Plattdeutsch.

Remember in the days of old Kings and Queens were family members all
across
Europe and even Russia.

Anglo-Saxon was a mixture of Low German, Latin, and the common and
in-common
language of the Anglos and those from Saxony - And the French language
came from Latin. So Saxony was mixed with Latin as well as the local
common and religion
based words.


Yes whilst American English is an attempt to be different.

Yes, we no longer say "whilst", among other things. Our language is
moving ahead in response to social challenges, as has been pointed out
here by many posters. Yes, indeed, vernacular English language (American
English at least) is being continuously revised by contributions - and
outright thefts - from other languages. On the other hand, words and
phrases from English are being taken wholesale by other languages. It
happens both ways. GF - if you insist on speaking and writing as if you
are a Dickens contemporary, do whatever makes you happy. But - you are
more and more irrelevant as your speech patterns age and get stuck in the
past.