Daily Mirror

from Daily Mirror

Thanks Paul. The viewing figures were miniscule. Did you see Dick's
skeleton? Extremely pronounced curved spine, the vernacular for which is
hunch backed. Your version of events surrounding the alleged mystery of
what happened to the children is just that... a version. A theory. And
not necessarily the truth. Many believe that Shakespeare was spot on.
Another theory that might be true... and might not be.
Your approach to your belief in Richard III's new improved image seems
rather didactic. Your comments are no more accurate or inaccurate than mine.

All the best, Kevin

Perhaps I should have left it but as you can see the arrogance of this
ignoramous had to be responded to..... My reply read....

My comments are based on over 40 years of study of the period and man,
King Richard that is, I don't use pegoratives, so I do know exactly what
I am talking about regarding King Richard. Hunch backed is a totally
different condition and it is insulting the many people who are dealing
with the condition daily to exaggerate their courage in dealing with it.
As I stated Michael Phelps has the same condition. Hardly call him hunch
backed would one? Experts on the condition all say that one would only
have known about it if one saw the man naked, and in the 15th century
that didn't happen often!
Still if you want to remain in your bubble of ill informed ignorance so
be it.
See what you've done now, got me really angry!
Won't read your reviews any more, and goodbye to your Friday morning
slot with your mate. Have deleted his show from my timer.
Cheers
Paul

Lol...have noticed that the Richard haters/believers in 'he dunnit' are becoming more and more frenetic. First we have Starkey whose rants are becoming more demented by the day...to a lesser extent we have Fellowes...Have you ever seen a pair more resembling Laurel and Hardy than this pair...although Laurel and Hardy were genuinely funny...and now this boring twerp...While we were queuing up at at Leicester I had read in the DM that morning of the 'hysteria' surrounding the reburial and the crowds queuing up resembled those hysterical people who had lined the route of Diana's funeral...I expected on arrival to see masses of people running hysterically around with teapots on their heads yelling 'Im a teapot, I'm a teapot...'....I shared what I had read with the lovely people I got chatting to in the queue and we had a good laugh about it...you really have to feel,sorry for these people writing these silly articles...I guess they think it's edgy to go against the general consensus...but in actual fact all they look is daft....Eileen

I understand how he rattled you Paul - if I had a visual image of him it would be of some sort of Edward G Robinson character digging dirt, cigarette in hand. It's so easy to get rattled by journalists and trolls; there was one claiming that Richard didn't speak a word of English, only French! It's a sad reflection of the society in which we live which thrives on news about evil, not good. Perhaps it comes from Hollywood blockbusters where no-one seems to feel pain? Not good to be suspended between them and Starkey. But goodonya (as they say where I once lived) for having a go at him. H From: "Paul Trevor Bale bale475@... []" <> To: <> Sent: Monday, 30 March 2015, 19:04 Subject: Daily Mirror
Perhaps I should have left it but as you can see the arrogance of this
ignoramous had to be responded to..... My reply read....

My comments are based on over 40 years of study of the period and man,
King Richard that is, I don't use pegoratives, so I do know exactly what
I am talking about regarding King Richard. Hunch backed is a totally
different condition and it is insulting the many people who are dealing
with the condition daily to exaggerate their courage in dealing with it.
As I stated Michael Phelps has the same condition. Hardly call him hunch
backed would one? Experts on the condition all say that one would only
have known about it if one saw the man naked, and in the 15th century
that didn't happen often!
Still if you want to remain in your bubble of ill informed ignorance so
be it.
See what you've done now, got me really angry!
Won't read your reviews any more, and goodbye to your Friday morning
slot with your mate. Have deleted his show from my timer.
Cheers
Paul

Well Paul it's nice he replied. And removed all doubt that he's an
idiot who doesn't know the difference between history and fiction.
Not to denigrate the younger generation of reporters, but they seem to be
less than competent.
In all truth, the US media is so bad about covering for the politics here
they love I can find better coverage of US politics on the Daily Mail.
Sad.

He is hardly young and on the tv show he does a 'review' on every
Friday he is always being asked about his hair dye! I would guess he
is around 50.
But as we all know, no reporter ever let the truth get in the way of
a good story!
Paul
Just had a response from him to my response. I deleted it unread.


On 31/03/2015 07:55, 'Terence Buckaloo'
tandjules@... [] wrote:
Well Paul it's nice he replied.  And removed all doubt
that he's an idiot who doesn't know the difference between
history and fiction.
 
Not to denigrate the younger generation of reporters,
but they seem to be less than competent.
 
In all truth, the US media is so bad about covering for
the politics here they love I can find better coverage of US
politics on the Daily Mail.  Sad.

Journalism is DEAD. There seem to be no standards, and certainly no checks on spelling and grammar. Finding three or more sources is no more, What we see, hear and read is biased, and opinion rather than fact.



On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:55 AM, 'Terence Buckaloo'
tandjules@... [] <> wrote:


Well Paul it's nice he replied. And removed all doubt that he's an idiot who doesn't know the difference between history and fiction.
Not to denigrate the younger generation of reporters, but they seem to be less than competent.
In all truth, the US media is so bad about covering for the politics here they love I can find better coverage of US politics on the Daily Mail. Sad.

What a rude and ignorant letter! Having scoliosis myself, I am tempted to write to him, but I suspect he is beyond educating that a 'hunchback' is not the 'vernacular' for a curved spine. In the 30+ years since I was diagnosed at 13, no-one has ever called me a 'hunchback.' There wouldn't be any need to as you can't see it, and I have been lucky that it has never interfered with my life. I wonder though how people who really have kyphosis feel about these throwaway comments. The way it is thrown around so casually there is a definite edge of hunchback=caricature villain.Unfortunately, the willful ignorance of some journalists has a put a small cloud over an otherwise wonderful week. The worst was the one by Michael Thornton on the Daily Mail website. I don't understand why people who call themselves journalists clearly don't do any research at all on whatever they are writing about.Journalistic standards are definitely going downhill. There is also plenty of unintentional misinformation too. I spent yesterday on a wild goose chase because the Australian media doesn't know what a direct descendant is. I thought they had discovered something on John of Gloucester, but it was about more dna findings about the Beauforts (details in another post.)Nico On Tuesday, 31 March 2015, 13:58, "Pamela Bain pbain@... []" <> wrote:
Journalism is DEAD. There seem to be no standards, and certainly no checks on spelling and grammar. Finding three or more sources is no more, What we see, hear and read is biased, and opinion rather than fact.



On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:55 AM, 'Terence Buckaloo'
tandjules@... [] <> wrote:

Well Paul it's nice he replied. And removed all doubt that he's an idiot who doesn't know the difference between history and fiction.
Not to denigrate the younger generation of reporters, but they seem to be less than competent.
In all truth, the US media is so bad about covering for the politics here they love I can find better coverage of US politics on the Daily Mail. Sad.

Nico, my mother has Scoliosis. I never ever knew until she was over 65 and I was her driver. I went into the doctor's office with her, and he was showing her her latest x-ray, and he pointed out to me her Scoliosis. Yes it is sad, that some mistakenly
and cruelly refer to Scoliosis as hunchbacked.
Once again, if one wants to know anything about Scoliosis, you need only to Goggle it. Ditto with the meaning of descendant!


On Mar 31, 2015, at 3:00 PM, Nicholas Brown
nico11238@... [] <> wrote:


What a rude and ignorant letter! Having scoliosis myself, I am tempted to write to him, but I suspect he is beyond educating that a 'hunchback' is not the 'vernacular' for a curved spine. In the 30+ years since I
was diagnosed at 13, no-one has ever called me a 'hunchback.' There wouldn't be any need to as you can't see it, and I have been lucky that it has never interfered with my life. I wonder though how people who really have kyphosis feel about these throwaway
comments. The way it is thrown around so casually there is a definite edge of hunchback=caricature villain.

Unfortunately, the willful ignorance of some journalists has a put a small cloud over an otherwise wonderful week. The worst was the one by Michael Thornton on the Daily Mail website. I don't understand
why people who call themselves journalists clearly don't do any research at all on whatever they are writing about.

Journalistic standards are definitely going downhill. There is also plenty of unintentional misinformation too. I spent yesterday on a wild goose chase because the Australian media doesn't know what a direct
descendant is. I thought they had discovered something on John of Gloucester, but it was about more dna findings about the Beauforts (details in another post.)

Nico







On Tuesday, 31 March 2015, 13:58, "Pamela Bain
pbain@... []" <> wrote:


Journalism is DEAD. There seem to be no standards, and certainly no checks on spelling and grammar. Finding three or more sources is no more, What we see, hear and read is biased, and opinion rather than fact.



On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:55 AM, 'Terence Buckaloo'
tandjules@... [] <> wrote:

Well Paul it's nice he replied. And removed all doubt that he's an idiot who doesn't know the difference between history and fiction.
Not to denigrate the younger generation of reporters, but they seem to be less than competent.
In all truth, the US media is so bad about covering for the politics here they love I can find better coverage of US politics on the Daily Mail. Sad.

Nico please do write to him. That way he might actually realise the
harm his uneducated and ignorant comments do.
Paul
his email is  - kevin.osullivan@...

On 31/03/2015 21:00, Nicholas Brown
nico11238@... [] wrote:
What a rude
and ignorant letter!  Having scoliosis myself, I am
tempted to write to him, but I suspect he is beyond
educating that a 'hunchback' is not the 'vernacular'
for a curved spine.  In the 30+ years since I was
diagnosed at 13, no-one has ever called me a
'hunchback.'  There wouldn't be any need to as you
can't see it, and I have been lucky that it has never
interfered with my life.  I wonder though how people
who really have kyphosis feel about these throwaway
comments.  The way it is thrown around so casually
there is a definite edge of hunchback=caricature
villain.

Unfortunately,
the willful ignorance of some journalists has a put a
small cloud over an otherwise wonderful week.  The
worst was the one by Michael Thornton on the Daily
Mail website.  I don't understand why people who call
themselves journalists clearly don't do any research
at all on whatever they are writing about.

Journalistic
standards are definitely going downhill. There is also
plenty of unintentional misinformation too.  I spent
yesterday on a wild goose chase because the Australian
media doesn't know what a direct descendant is.  I
thought they had discovered something on John of
Gloucester, but it was about more dna findings about
the Beauforts (details in another post.)

Nico







On
Tuesday, 31 March 2015, 13:58, "Pamela Bain
pbain@... []"
<>
wrote:


 
Journalism is DEAD. There seem to be no
standards, and certainly no checks on
spelling and grammar. Finding three or
more sources is no more, What we see, hear
and read is biased, and opinion rather
than fact. 



On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:55 AM, 'Terence
Buckaloo'
tandjules@...
[] <>
wrote:

 
Well Paul it's nice he
replied.  And removed all doubt
that he's an idiot who doesn't
know the difference between
history and fiction.
 
Not to denigrate the younger
generation of reporters, but
they seem to be less than
competent.
 
In all truth, the US media is
so bad about covering for the
politics here they love I can
find better coverage of US
politics on the Daily Mail. 
Sad.

I sent Kevin Sullivan an email today correcting the main points and recommending that he read Bertram Fields. His response was:Thanks for your e
mail. I was just going with the Shakespearean flow and making a few
jokes. I realise the play isn't necessarily historically accurate, but
it's more interesting than these new far more mundane theories. Which, I
noticed on Channel 4's reburial coverage, Julian Fellowes was very
doubtful about.
I don't accept that I was definitively wrong. But I thank you for taking the trouble to point out my possible errors.
Best wishes,
KevinThe original article appears to have been removed from the Mirror's website, so I had to access it through his twitter page. I wonder if they were quite a few other complaints.Nico On Wednesday, 1 April 2015, 8:39, "Paul Trevor Bale bale475@... []" <> wrote:
Nico please do write to him. That way he might actually realise the
harm his uneducated and ignorant comments do.
Paul
his email is - kevin.osullivan@...

On 31/03/2015 21:00, Nicholas Brown
nico11238@... [] wrote:
What a rude
and ignorant letter! Having scoliosis myself, I am
tempted to write to him, but I suspect he is beyond
educating that a 'hunchback' is not the 'vernacular'
for a curved spine. In the 30+ years since I was
diagnosed at 13, no-one has ever called me a
'hunchback.' There wouldn't be any need to as you
can't see it, and I have been lucky that it has never
interfered with my life. I wonder though how people
who really have kyphosis feel about these throwaway
comments. The way it is thrown around so casually
there is a definite edge of hunchback=caricature
villain.

Unfortunately,
the willful ignorance of some journalists has a put a
small cloud over an otherwise wonderful week. The
worst was the one by Michael Thornton on the Daily
Mail website. I don't understand why people who call
themselves journalists clearly don't do any research
at all on whatever they are writing about.

Journalistic
standards are definitely going downhill. There is also
plenty of unintentional misinformation too. I spent
yesterday on a wild goose chase because the Australian
media doesn't know what a direct descendant is. I
thought they had discovered something on John of
Gloucester, but it was about more dna findings about
the Beauforts (details in another post.)

Nico







On
Tuesday, 31 March 2015, 13:58, "Pamela Bain
pbain@... []"
<>
wrote:


Journalism is DEAD. There seem to be no
standards, and certainly no checks on
spelling and grammar. Finding three or
more sources is no more, What we see, hear
and read is biased, and opinion rather
than fact.



On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:55 AM, 'Terence
Buckaloo'
tandjules@...
[] <>
wrote:

Well Paul it's nice he
replied. And removed all doubt
that he's an idiot who doesn't
know the difference between
history and fiction.
Not to denigrate the younger
generation of reporters, but
they seem to be less than
competent.
In all truth, the US media is
so bad about covering for the
politics here they love I can
find better coverage of US
politics on the Daily Mail.
Sad.

I realise the play isn't necessarily historically accurate, but
it's more interesting than these new far more mundane theories.Really!! If Mr Sullivan really, and I mean REALLY looked into what really happened, he'd find it far more fascinating than he could possibly imagine.

Well done Nico.
I think his much more sober response must mean he has received a lot
of complaint. However, one has to note his mentioning Julian
Fellowes, a man whose literary credentials are in doubt after his
dreadful Dowton series 2 scibbles, and who knows absolutely nothing
about the Middle Ages or Richard except what he has read in
Shakespeare. So he still wants to camp out with the 'moderately
famous'. Why C4 had him in Leicester is beyond me!
Good try though Nico.
Paul


On 02/04/2015 00:50, Nicholas Brown
nico11238@... [] wrote:

I
sent Kevin Sullivan an email today correcting the main
points and recommending that he read Bertram Fields. 
His response was:

Thanks for
your e mail. I was just going with the Shakespearean
flow and making a few jokes. I realise the play
isn't necessarily historically accurate, but it's
more interesting than these new far more mundane
theories. Which, I noticed on Channel 4's reburial
coverage, Julian Fellowes was very doubtful about.
I don't accept that I was definitively wrong. But I
thank you for taking the trouble to point out my
possible errors.
Best wishes,
Kevin

The
original article appears to have been removed from the
Mirror's website, so I had to access it through his
twitter page.  I wonder if they were quite a few other
complaints.

Nico


On
Wednesday, 1 April 2015, 8:39, "Paul Trevor Bale
bale475@... []"
<>
wrote:


 
Nico please do write to him. That way
he might actually realise the harm his
uneducated and ignorant comments do.
Paul
his email is  - kevin.osullivan@...

On
31/03/2015 21:00, Nicholas Brown nico11238@...
[] wrote:
What
a rude and ignorant letter! 
Having scoliosis myself, I
am tempted to write to him,
but I suspect he is beyond
educating that a 'hunchback'
is not the 'vernacular' for
a curved spine.  In the 30+
years since I was diagnosed
at 13, no-one has ever
called me a 'hunchback.' 
There wouldn't be any need
to as you can't see it, and
I have been lucky that it
has never interfered with my
life.  I wonder though how
people who really have
kyphosis feel about these
throwaway comments.  The way
it is thrown around so
casually there is a definite
edge of hunchback=caricature
villain.

Unfortunately,
the willful ignorance of
some journalists has a put a
small cloud over an
otherwise wonderful week. 
The worst was the one by
Michael Thornton on the
Daily Mail website.  I don't
understand why people who
call themselves journalists
clearly don't do any
research at all on whatever
they are writing about.

Journalistic
standards are definitely
going downhill. There is
also plenty of unintentional
misinformation too.  I spent
yesterday on a wild goose
chase because the Australian
media doesn't know what a
direct descendant is.  I
thought they had discovered
something on John of
Gloucester, but it was about
more dna findings about the
Beauforts (details in
another post.)

Nico







On
Tuesday, 31 March 2015,
13:58, "Pamela Bain pbain@...
[]"
<>
wrote:


 
Journalism is
DEAD. There seem
to be no
standards, and
certainly no
checks on
spelling and
grammar. Finding
three or more
sources is no
more, What we
see, hear and
read is biased,
and opinion
rather than
fact. 



On Mar 31, 2015,
at 1:55 AM,
'Terence
Buckaloo'
tandjules@...
[]
<>
wrote:

 
Well Paul
it's nice he
replied.  And
removed all
doubt that
he's an idiot
who doesn't
know the
difference
between
history and
fiction.
 
Not to
denigrate the
younger
generation of
reporters,
but they seem
to be less
than
competent.
 
In all
truth, the US
media is so
bad about
covering for
the politics
here they love
I can find
better
coverage of US
politics on
the Daily
Mail.  Sad.

A journalist without much imagination? Whatever next?:-)
Paul



On 02/04/2015 08:34,
davetheslave44@... [] wrote:
I
realise the play isn't necessarily historically accurate, but
it's more interesting than these new far more mundane theories.

Really!! If Mr Sullivan really, and I mean REALLY looked into
what really happened, he'd find it far more fascinating than he
could possibly imagine.

Well done Nico. I notice Julian Fellowes has now become an expert historian because the truth is so boring. It's a wonder they didn't ask Benedict Cumberbatch for a final verdict! It's like those on Pointless who know every goal scorer in the football league but have never heard of Nelson H Sorry all football fans I was just using an example; I could have used the X Factor H From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <> To: "" <> Sent: Thursday, 2 April 2015, 0:50 Subject: Re: Re: Daily Mirror
I sent Kevin Sullivan an email today correcting the main points and recommending that he read Bertram Fields. His response was:Thanks for your e
mail. I was just going with the Shakespearean flow and making a few
jokes. I realise the play isn't necessarily historically accurate, but
it's more interesting than these new far more mundane theories. Which, I
noticed on Channel 4's reburial coverage, Julian Fellowes was very
doubtful about.
I don't accept that I was definitively wrong. But I thank you for taking the trouble to point out my possible errors.
Best wishes,
KevinThe original article appears to have been removed from the Mirror's website, so I had to access it through his twitter page. I wonder if they were quite a few other complaints.Nico On Wednesday, 1 April 2015, 8:39, "Paul Trevor Bale bale475@... []" <> wrote:
Nico please do write to him. That way he might actually realise the
harm his uneducated and ignorant comments do.
Paul
his email is - kevin.osullivan@...

On 31/03/2015 21:00, Nicholas Brown
nico11238@... [] wrote:
What a rude
and ignorant letter! Having scoliosis myself, I am
tempted to write to him, but I suspect he is beyond
educating that a 'hunchback' is not the 'vernacular'
for a curved spine. In the 30+ years since I was
diagnosed at 13, no-one has ever called me a
'hunchback.' There wouldn't be any need to as you
can't see it, and I have been lucky that it has never
interfered with my life. I wonder though how people
who really have kyphosis feel about these throwaway
comments. The way it is thrown around so casually
there is a definite edge of hunchback=caricature
villain.

Unfortunately,
the willful ignorance of some journalists has a put a
small cloud over an otherwise wonderful week. The
worst was the one by Michael Thornton on the Daily
Mail website. I don't understand why people who call
themselves journalists clearly don't do any research
at all on whatever they are writing about.

Journalistic
standards are definitely going downhill. There is also
plenty of unintentional misinformation too. I spent
yesterday on a wild goose chase because the Australian
media doesn't know what a direct descendant is. I
thought they had discovered something on John of
Gloucester, but it was about more dna findings about
the Beauforts (details in another post.)

Nico







On
Tuesday, 31 March 2015, 13:58, "Pamela Bain
pbain@... []"
<>
wrote:


Journalism is DEAD. There seem to be no
standards, and certainly no checks on
spelling and grammar. Finding three or
more sources is no more, What we see, hear
and read is biased, and opinion rather
than fact.



On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:55 AM, 'Terence
Buckaloo'
tandjules@...
[] <>
wrote:

Well Paul it's nice he
replied. And removed all doubt
that he's an idiot who doesn't
know the difference between
history and fiction.
Not to denigrate the younger
generation of reporters, but
they seem to be less than
competent.
In all truth, the US media is
so bad about covering for the
politics here they love I can
find better coverage of US
politics on the Daily Mail.
Sad.

History is written by the winners, I do not remember who said/wrote that. And in the time now, children get sketchy lessons in history, taught by education majors, who know nothing about history. It is hard enough with the paucity of documents to know,
as has been stated. But it still shocks me that actors, producers, etc. are believed to be experts.



On Apr 2, 2015, at 4:28 AM, Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... [] <> wrote:


Well done Nico. I notice Julian Fellowes has now become an expert historian because the truth is so boring. It's a wonder they didn't ask Benedict Cumberbatch for a final verdict! It's like those on Pointless
who know every goal scorer in the football league but have never heard of Nelson H Sorry all football fans I was just using an example; I could have used the X Factor H

From: "Nicholas Brown
nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>

Sent: Thursday, 2 April 2015, 0:50
Subject: Re: Re: Daily Mirror


I sent Kevin Sullivan an email today correcting the main points and recommending that he read Bertram Fields. His response was:

Thanks for your e mail. I was just going with the Shakespearean flow and making a few jokes. I realise the play isn't necessarily historically accurate, but it's more interesting than these new far more
mundane theories. Which, I noticed on Channel 4's reburial coverage, Julian Fellowes was very doubtful about.
I don't accept that I was definitively wrong. But I thank you for taking the trouble to point out my possible errors.
Best wishes,
Kevin

The original article appears to have been removed from the Mirror's website, so I had to access it through his twitter page. I wonder if they were quite a few other complaints.

Nico


On Wednesday, 1 April 2015, 8:39, "Paul Trevor Bale
bale475@... []" <> wrote:


Nico please do write to him. That way he might actually realise the harm his uneducated and ignorant comments do.
Paul
his email is -
kevin.osullivan@...

On 31/03/2015 21:00, Nicholas Brown
nico11238@... [] wrote:
What a rude and ignorant letter! Having scoliosis myself, I am tempted to write to him, but I suspect he is beyond educating that a 'hunchback' is not the 'vernacular' for a curved spine. In the 30+ years
since I was diagnosed at 13, no-one has ever called me a 'hunchback.' There wouldn't be any need to as you can't see it, and I have been lucky that it has never interfered with my life. I wonder though how people who really have kyphosis feel about these
throwaway comments. The way it is thrown around so casually there is a definite edge of hunchback=caricature villain.

Unfortunately, the willful ignorance of some journalists has a put a small cloud over an otherwise wonderful week. The worst was the one by Michael Thornton on the Daily Mail website. I don't
understand why people who call themselves journalists clearly don't do any research at all on whatever they are writing about.

Journalistic standards are definitely going downhill. There is also plenty of unintentional misinformation too. I spent yesterday on a wild goose chase because the Australian media doesn't know
what a direct descendant is. I thought they had discovered something on John of Gloucester, but it was about more dna findings about the Beauforts (details in another post.)

Nico







On Tuesday, 31 March 2015, 13:58, "Pamela Bain
pbain@... []"
<> wrote:


Journalism is DEAD. There seem to be no standards, and certainly no checks on spelling and grammar. Finding three or more sources is no more, What we see, hear and read is biased, and opinion rather than fact.



On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:55 AM, 'Terence Buckaloo'
tandjules@... [] <> wrote:

Well Paul it's nice he replied. And removed all doubt that he's an idiot who doesn't know the difference between history and fiction.
Not to denigrate the younger generation of reporters, but they seem to be less than competent.
In all truth, the US media is so bad about covering for the politics here they love I can find better coverage of US politics on the Daily Mail. Sad.

Has anyone looked at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Fellowes?
Never mind the Wiki, but if there was a Fellowes ancestor in 1653, might the
line be traced even further back? To TWOR, perchance? And which rose gained the
Fellowes support?
Sandra
=^..^=
From: mailto:
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 12:09 PM
To: mailto:
Subject: Re: Re: Daily
Mirror

History is written by the winners, I do not remember who said/wrote that.
And in the time now, children get sketchy lessons in history, taught by
education majors, who know nothing about history. It is hard enough with the
paucity of documents to know, as has been stated. But it still shocks me that
actors, producers, etc. are believed to be experts.
On Apr 2, 2015, at 4:28 AM, Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []
<>
wrote:
Well done Nico. I notice
Julian Fellowes has now become an expert historian because the truth is so
boring. It's a wonder they didn't ask Benedict Cumberbatch for a final
verdict! It's like those on Pointless who know every goal scorer in the
football league but have never heard of Nelson H Sorry all
football fans I was just using an example; I could have used the X Factor
H
From:
"Nicholas Brown nico11238@...
[]" <>To: ""
<>
Sent: Thursday, 2 April
2015, 0:50Subject: Re:
Re: Daily Mirror
I sent Kevin
Sullivan an email today correcting the main points and recommending that he
read Bertram Fields. His response was:
Thanks for your e
mail. I was just going with the Shakespearean flow and making a few jokes. I
realise the play isn't necessarily historically accurate, but it's more
interesting than these new far more mundane theories. Which, I noticed on
Channel 4's reburial coverage, Julian Fellowes was very doubtful about.I don't accept that I was definitively
wrong. But I thank you for taking the trouble to point out my possible
errors.Best wishes,
Kevin
The original
article appears to have been removed from the Mirror's website, so I had to
access it through his twitter page. I wonder if they were quite a few
other complaints.
Nico

On Wednesday, 1 April 2015, 8:39, "Paul
Trevor Bale bale475@...
[]" <>
wrote:
Nico please do write to him. That way he might actually realise the harm
his uneducated and ignorant comments do.Paulhis
email is - kevin.osullivan@...
On 31/03/2015 21:00, Nicholas Brown nico11238@...
[] wrote:
What a rude and
ignorant letter! Having scoliosis myself, I am tempted to write to
him, but I suspect he is beyond educating that a 'hunchback' is not the
'vernacular' for a curved spine. In the 30+ years since I was
diagnosed at 13, no-one has ever called me a 'hunchback.' There
wouldn't be any need to as you can't see it, and I have been lucky that it
has never interfered with my life. I wonder though how people who
really have kyphosis feel about these throwaway comments. The way it
is thrown around so casually there is a definite edge of
hunchback=caricature villain.
Unfortunately,
the willful ignorance of some journalists has a put a small cloud over an
otherwise wonderful week. The worst was the one by Michael Thornton on
the Daily Mail website. I don't understand why people who call
themselves journalists clearly don't do any research at all on whatever they
are writing about.
Journalistic
standards are definitely going downhill. There is also plenty of
unintentional misinformation too. I spent yesterday on a wild goose
chase because the Australian media doesn't know what a direct descendant
is. I thought they had discovered something on John of Gloucester, but
it was about more dna findings about the Beauforts (details in another
post.)
Nico


On Tuesday, 31 March 2015, 13:58,
"Pamela Bain pbain@... []"
mailto:
wrote:
Journalism is DEAD. There seem to be no standards, and certainly no
checks on spelling and grammar. Finding three or more sources is no more,
What we see, hear and read is biased, and opinion rather than fact.
On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:55 AM, 'Terence Buckaloo' tandjules@...
[] <>
wrote:
Well Paul it's nice he replied. And removed all doubt that he's
an idiot who doesn't know the difference between history and
fiction.
Not to denigrate the younger generation of reporters, but they seem
to be less than competent.
In all truth, the US media is so bad about covering for the politics
here they love I can find better coverage of US politics on the Daily
Mail.
Sad.

What history they get nowadays is WW2 on, without any real
understanding of why it happened.
Stupid.
What is that famous saying, those who do not remember the past are
condemned to repeat it.
Paul



On 02/04/2015 12:09, Pamela Bain
pbain@... [] wrote:
History is written by the winners, I do not remember who
said/wrote that. And in the time now, children get sketchy
lessons in history, taught by education majors, who know nothing
about history. It is hard enough with the paucity of documents
to know, as has been stated. But it still shocks me that actors,
producers, etc. are believed to be experts. 



On Apr 2, 2015, at 4:28 AM, Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...
[] <>
wrote:

 
Well
done Nico. I notice Julian Fellowes has now become an
expert historian because the truth is so boring. It's a
wonder they didn't ask Benedict Cumberbatch for a final
verdict! It's like those on Pointless who know every
goal scorer in the football league but have never heard
of Nelson  H  Sorry all football fans I was just using
an example; I could have used the X Factor H

From:
"Nicholas Brown
nico11238@...
[]" <>
To:
""
<>

Sent:
Thursday, 2 April 2015, 0:50
Subject:
Re: Re: Daily Mirror

 

I
sent Kevin Sullivan an email
today correcting the main
points and recommending that
he read Bertram Fields.  His
response was:

Thanks
for your e mail. I was just
going with the Shakespearean
flow and making a few jokes.
I realise the play isn't
necessarily historically
accurate, but it's more
interesting than these new
far more mundane theories.
Which, I noticed on Channel
4's reburial coverage,
Julian Fellowes was very
doubtful about.
I don't accept that I was
definitively wrong. But I
thank you for taking the
trouble to point out my
possible errors.
Best wishes,
Kevin

The
original article appears to
have been removed from the
Mirror's website, so I had to
access it through his twitter
page.  I wonder if they were
quite a few other complaints.

Nico


On Wednesday,
1 April 2015, 8:39, "Paul
Trevor Bale
bale475@...
[]"
<>
wrote:


 
Nico please
do write to him.
That way he
might actually
realise the harm
his uneducated
and ignorant
comments do.
Paul
his email is  -
kevin.osullivan@...

On
31/03/2015
21:00,
Nicholas Brown
nico11238@... [] wrote:
What
a rude and
ignorant
letter! 
Having
scoliosis
myself, I am
tempted to
write to him,
but I suspect
he is beyond
educating that
a 'hunchback'
is not the
'vernacular'
for a curved
spine.  In the
30+ years
since I was
diagnosed at
13, no-one has
ever called me
a
'hunchback.' 
There wouldn't
be any need to
as you can't
see it, and I
have been
lucky that it
has never
interfered
with my life. 
I wonder
though how
people who
really have
kyphosis feel
about these
throwaway
comments.  The
way it is
thrown around
so casually
there is a
definite edge
of
hunchback=caricature
villain.

Unfortunately, the
willful
ignorance of
some
journalists
has a put a
small cloud
over an
otherwise
wonderful
week.  The
worst was the
one by Michael
Thornton on
the Daily Mail
website.  I
don't
understand why
people who
call
themselves
journalists
clearly don't
do any
research at
all on
whatever they
are writing
about.

Journalistic
standards are
definitely
going
downhill.
There is also
plenty of
unintentional
misinformation
too.  I spent
yesterday on a
wild goose
chase because
the Australian
media doesn't
know what a
direct
descendant
is.  I thought
they had
discovered
something on
John of
Gloucester,
but it was
about more dna
findings about
the Beauforts
(details in
another post.)

Nico







On
Tuesday, 31
March 2015,
13:58, "Pamela
Bain
pbain@...
[]"
<> wrote:


 
Journalism
is DEAD. There
seem to be no
standards, and
certainly no
checks on
spelling and
grammar.
Finding three
or more
sources is no
more, What we
see, hear and
read is
biased, and
opinion rather
than fact. 



On Mar 31,
2015, at 1:55
AM, 'Terence
Buckaloo'
tandjules@... [] <>
wrote:

 
Well Paul
it's nice he
replied.  And
removed all
doubt that
he's an idiot
who doesn't
know the
difference
between
history and
fiction.
 
Not to
denigrate the
younger
generation of
reporters,
but they seem
to be less
than
competent.
 
In all
truth, the US
media is so
bad about
covering for
the politics
here they love
I can find
better
coverage of US
politics on
the Daily
Mail.  Sad.

Sorry Sandra, but who cares? The man is an actor/writer, though I do
challenge the "writer" claim regarding some of his work!
Paul


On 02/04/2015 12:18, 'Sandra J Machin'
sandramachin@... [] wrote:
Has anyone looked at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Fellowes?
Never mind the Wiki, but if there was a Fellowes ancestor
in 1653, might the line be traced even further back? To
TWOR, perchance? And which rose gained the Fellowes
support?
 
Sandra
=^..^=
 
From: mailto:
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 12:09 PM
To: mailto:
Subject: Re: Re:
Daily Mirror
 
 


History is written by the winners, I do not remember
who said/wrote that. And in the time now, children get
sketchy lessons in history, taught by education majors,
who know nothing about history. It is hard enough with
the paucity of documents to know, as has been stated.
But it still shocks me that actors, producers, etc. are
believed to be experts.



On Apr 2, 2015, at 4:28 AM, Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...
[] <>
wrote:

 
Well done Nico. I notice Julian
Fellowes has now become an expert historian
because the truth is so boring. It's a wonder
they didn't ask Benedict Cumberbatch for a final
verdict! It's like those on Pointless who know
every goal scorer in the football league but
have never heard of Nelson  H  Sorry all
football fans I was just using an example; I
could have used the X Factor H
 
From:
"Nicholas Brown nico11238@...
[]" <>
To:
""
<>

Sent:
Thursday, 2 April 2015, 0:50
Subject:
Re: Re: Daily
Mirror
 
 
 
I sent Kevin
Sullivan an email
today correcting the
main points and
recommending that he
read Bertram Fields. 
His response was:
 
Thanks
for your e mail. I
was just going with
the Shakespearean
flow and making a
few jokes. I realise
the play isn't
necessarily
historically
accurate, but it's
more interesting
than these new far
more mundane
theories. Which, I
noticed on Channel
4's reburial
coverage, Julian
Fellowes was very
doubtful about.
I don't accept that
I was definitively
wrong. But I thank
you for taking the
trouble to point out
my possible errors.
Best wishes,
Kevin
 
The original
article appears to
have been removed from
the Mirror's website,
so I had to access it
through his twitter
page.  I wonder if
they were quite a few
other complaints.
 
Nico


On
Wednesday, 1 April
2015, 8:39, "Paul
Trevor Bale bale475@...
[]"
<>
wrote:


 
Nico
please do
write to him.
That way he
might actually
realise the
harm his
uneducated and
ignorant
comments do.
Paul
his email is 
- kevin.osullivan@...

On
31/03/2015
21:00,
Nicholas Brown
nico11238@...
[]
wrote:
What
a rude and
ignorant
letter! 
Having
scoliosis
myself, I am
tempted to
write to him,
but I suspect
he is beyond
educating that
a 'hunchback'
is not the
'vernacular'
for a curved
spine.  In the
30+ years
since I was
diagnosed at
13, no-one has
ever called me
a
'hunchback.' 
There wouldn't
be any need to
as you can't
see it, and I
have been
lucky that it
has never
interfered
with my life. 
I wonder
though how
people who
really have
kyphosis feel
about these
throwaway
comments.  The
way it is
thrown around
so casually
there is a
definite edge
of
hunchback=caricature
villain.
 
Unfortunately,
the willful
ignorance of
some
journalists
has a put a
small cloud
over an
otherwise
wonderful
week.  The
worst was the
one by Michael
Thornton on
the Daily Mail
website.  I
don't
understand why
people who
call
themselves
journalists
clearly don't
do any
research at
all on
whatever they
are writing
about.
 
Journalistic
standards are
definitely
going
downhill.
There is also
plenty of
unintentional
misinformation
too.  I spent
yesterday on a
wild goose
chase because
the Australian
media doesn't
know what a
direct
descendant
is.  I thought
they had
discovered
something on
John of
Gloucester,
but it was
about more dna
findings about
the Beauforts
(details in
another post.)
 
Nico
 
 
 




On
Tuesday, 31
March 2015,
13:58, "Pamela
Bain pbain@...
[]"
mailto:
wrote:


 
Journalism
is DEAD. There
seem to be no
standards, and
certainly no
checks on
spelling and
grammar.
Finding three
or more
sources is no
more, What we
see, hear and
read is
biased, and
opinion rather
than fact.



On Mar 31,
2015, at 1:55
AM, 'Terence
Buckaloo' tandjules@...
[]
<>
wrote:

 
Well Paul
it's nice he
replied.  And
removed all
doubt that
he's an idiot
who doesn't
know the
difference
between
history and
fiction.
 
Not to
denigrate the
younger
generation of
reporters,
but they seem
to be less
than
competent.
 
In all
truth, the US
media is so
bad about
covering for
the politics
here they love
I can find
better
coverage of US
politics on
the Daily
Mail.  Sad.


 

I was curious, that's all, Paul. No big deal. I wondered if
his bias was based on family history.
From: mailto:
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 6:27 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Daily
Mirror
Sorry Sandra, but who cares? The man is an actor/writer, though I do
challenge the "writer" claim regarding some of his work!Paul
On 02/04/2015 12:18, 'Sandra J Machin' sandramachin@...
[] wrote:
Has anyone looked at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Fellowes? Never mind the
Wiki, but if there was a Fellowes ancestor in 1653, might the line be traced
even further back? To TWOR, perchance? And which rose gained the Fellowes
support?
Sandra
=^..^=
From: mailto:
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 12:09 PM
To: mailto:
Subject: Re: Re: Daily
Mirror
History is written by the winners, I do not remember who said/wrote that.
And in the time now, children get sketchy lessons in history, taught by
education majors, who know nothing about history. It is hard enough with the
paucity of documents to know, as has been stated. But it still shocks me that
actors, producers, etc. are believed to be experts.
On Apr 2, 2015, at 4:28 AM, Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...
[] <> wrote:
Well done Nico. I notice
Julian Fellowes has now become an expert historian because the truth is so
boring. It's a wonder they didn't ask Benedict Cumberbatch for a final
verdict! It's like those on Pointless who know every goal scorer in the
football league but have never heard of Nelson H Sorry all
football fans I was just using an example; I could have used the X Factor
H
From:
"Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>To: "" <> Sent: Thursday, 2 April 2015,
0:50Subject: Re: [Richard
III Society Forum] Re: Daily Mirror
I sent Kevin
Sullivan an email today correcting the main points and recommending that he
read Bertram Fields. His response was:
Thanks for your e mail. I
was just going with the Shakespearean flow and making a few jokes. I realise
the play isn't necessarily historically accurate, but it's more interesting
than these new far more mundane theories. Which, I noticed on Channel 4's
reburial coverage, Julian Fellowes was very doubtful about.I don't accept that I was definitively
wrong. But I thank you for taking the trouble to point out my possible
errors.Best wishes,
Kevin
The original
article appears to have been removed from the Mirror's website, so I had to
access it through his twitter page. I wonder if they were quite a few
other complaints.
Nico

On Wednesday, 1 April 2015, 8:39, "Paul
Trevor Bale bale475@... []" <> wrote:
Nico please do write to him. That way he might actually realise the
harm his uneducated and ignorant comments do.Paulhis email is - kevin.osullivan@...
On 31/03/2015 21:00, Nicholas Brown
nico11238@...
[] wrote:
What a rude and
ignorant letter! Having scoliosis myself, I am tempted to write to
him, but I suspect he is beyond educating that a 'hunchback' is not the
'vernacular' for a curved spine. In the 30+ years since I was
diagnosed at 13, no-one has ever called me a 'hunchback.' There
wouldn't be any need to as you can't see it, and I have been lucky that it
has never interfered with my life. I wonder though how people who
really have kyphosis feel about these throwaway comments. The way it
is thrown around so casually there is a definite edge of
hunchback=caricature villain.
Unfortunately, the willful ignorance of some journalists has a put
a small cloud over an otherwise wonderful week. The worst was the
one by Michael Thornton on the Daily Mail website. I don't
understand why people who call themselves journalists clearly don't do any
research at all on whatever they are writing about.
Journalistic
standards are definitely going downhill. There is also plenty of
unintentional misinformation too. I spent yesterday on a wild goose
chase because the Australian media doesn't know what a direct descendant
is. I thought they had discovered something on John of Gloucester,
but it was about more dna findings about the Beauforts (details in another
post.)
Nico


On Tuesday, 31 March 2015, 13:58,
"Pamela Bain pbain@...
[]" mailto:
wrote:
Journalism is DEAD. There seem to be no standards, and certainly no
checks on spelling and grammar. Finding three or more sources is no more,
What we see, hear and read is biased, and opinion rather than fact.
On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:55 AM, 'Terence Buckaloo' tandjules@...
[] <>
wrote:
Well Paul it's nice he replied. And removed all doubt that
he's an idiot who doesn't know the difference between history and
fiction.
Not to denigrate the younger generation of reporters, but they
seem to be less than competent.
In all truth, the US media is so bad about covering for the
politics here they love I can find better coverage of US politics on the
Daily Mail.
Sad.

Oh, I say, Paul - I have never watched 'Downton Abbey', but surely 'Gosford Park' was marvellous?I don't know about Fellowes part of his ancestry, but he's descended from Anne St Leger, I believe.Pansy

Well it took far longer than it should have done, and I thought
Stephen Fry's part and performance a joke! In a bad way that is.
Deserving of an Oscar? Sorry but I think not. But I often wonder how
some Oscars get given. Like this year's Best in a Foreign Language
'Ida'. Slow isn't the word.
Paul


On 02/04/2015 18:42, pansydobersby
wrote:
Oh, I say, Paul - I have never watched 'Downton Abbey', but surely
'Gosford Park' was marvellous?

I don't know about Fellowes part of his ancestry, but he's
descended from Anne St Leger, I believe.

Pansy

Paul, we are of the same mind here. I wish I knew half as much as most of the people who post on this group. Thus I flatter myself with the first sentence. But
yes, everyone needs to know about history, because we do seem to repeat the same foolish mistakes, and send our youths, our best, brightest and most courageous, to be slaughtered.

From: [mailto:]

Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 12:26 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Daily Mirror


What history they get nowadays is WW2 on, without any real understanding of why it happened.
Stupid.
What is that famous saying, those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
Paul



On 02/04/2015 12:09, Pamela Bain
pbain@... [] wrote:
History is written by the winners, I do not remember who said/wrote that. And in the time now, children get sketchy lessons in history, taught by education majors, who know nothing about history. It is hard
enough with the paucity of documents to know, as has been stated. But it still shocks me that actors, producers, etc. are believed to be experts.



On Apr 2, 2015, at 4:28 AM, Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... [] <> wrote:

Well done Nico. I notice Julian Fellowes has now become an expert historian because the truth is so boring. It's a wonder they didn't
ask Benedict Cumberbatch for a final verdict! It's like those on Pointless who know every goal scorer in the football league but have never heard of Nelson H Sorry all football fans I was just using an example; I could have used the X Factor H

From: "Nicholas Brown
nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>

Sent: Thursday, 2 April 2015, 0:50
Subject: Re: Re: Daily Mirror




I sent Kevin Sullivan an email today correcting the main points and recommending that he read Bertram Fields. His response was:

Thanks for your e mail. I was just going with the Shakespearean flow and making a few jokes. I realise the play isn't necessarily historically accurate,
but it's more interesting than these new far more mundane theories. Which, I noticed on Channel 4's reburial coverage, Julian Fellowes was very doubtful about.
I don't accept that I was definitively wrong. But I thank you for taking the trouble to point out my possible errors.
Best wishes,
Kevin

The original article appears to have been removed from the Mirror's website, so I had to access it through his twitter page. I wonder if they were quite a
few other complaints.

Nico

On Wednesday, 1 April 2015, 8:39, "Paul Trevor Bale
bale475@... []" <> wrote:



Nico please do write to him. That way he might actually realise the harm his uneducated and ignorant comments do.
Paul
his email is -
kevin.osullivan@...
On 31/03/2015 21:00, Nicholas Brown
nico11238@... [] wrote:
What a rude and ignorant letter! Having scoliosis myself, I am tempted to write to him, but I suspect he is beyond educating that a 'hunchback' is not the
'vernacular' for a curved spine. In the 30+ years since I was diagnosed at 13, no-one has ever called me a 'hunchback.' There wouldn't be any need to as you can't see it, and I have been lucky that it has never interfered with my life. I wonder though how
people who really have kyphosis feel about these throwaway comments. The way it is thrown around so casually there is a definite edge of hunchback=caricature villain.

Unfortunately, the willful ignorance of some journalists has a put a small cloud over an otherwise wonderful week. The worst was the one by Michael Thornton
on the Daily Mail website. I don't understand why people who call themselves journalists clearly don't do any research at all on whatever they are writing about.

Journalistic standards are definitely going downhill. There is also plenty of unintentional misinformation too. I spent yesterday on a wild goose chase because
the Australian media doesn't know what a direct descendant is. I thought they had discovered something on John of Gloucester, but it was about more dna findings about the Beauforts (details in another post.)

Nico





On Tuesday, 31 March 2015, 13:58, "Pamela Bain
pbain@... []"
<> wrote:



Journalism is DEAD. There seem to be no standards, and certainly no checks on spelling and grammar. Finding three or more sources is no more,
What we see, hear and read is biased, and opinion rather than fact.



On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:55 AM, 'Terence Buckaloo'
tandjules@... [] <> wrote:


Well Paul it’s nice he replied. And removed all doubt that he’s an idiot who doesn’t know the difference between history and fiction.

Not to denigrate the younger generation of “reporters”, but they seem to be less than competent.

In all truth, the US media is so bad about covering for the politics here they love I can find better coverage of US politics on the Daily Mail. Sad.

I am or was addicted to Downton Abbey, PBS said Season 6 will be the absolute last one. I also loved Gosford Park. However, I was shocked to see Sir Julian
as a speaker at the RIII re-interment. I wondered if he was a scholar of that period of history as well as a writer/producer. From what I read, it was not mentioned. So every Tom, Dick and Julian can have an opinion, but should they be allowed to ruin or tarnish
what was a rather more fitting and proper affair.

From: [mailto:]
On Behalf Of pansydobersby
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 12:43 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Daily Mirror


Oh, I say, Paul - I have never watched 'Downton Abbey', but surely 'Gosford Park' was marvellous?

I don't know about Fellowes part of his ancestry, but he's descended from Anne St Leger, I believe.

Pansy

I don't think he is a scholar of anything much, certainly not of
history, and definitely not of the fifteenth century, those plays
being his only source it appears.
I too have no idea why he was on the programme, nor Robert Lindsay
for that matter, who looked bored stiff during the service. So many
more deserving of his seat in the cathedral.
Paul


On 02/04/2015 19:14, Pamela Bain
pbain@... [] wrote:
I
am or was addicted to Downton Abbey, PBS said Season 6 will
be the absolute last one. I also loved Gosford Park.
 However, I was shocked to see Sir Julian as a speaker at
the RIII re-interment. I wondered if he was a scholar of
that period of history as well as a writer/producer. From
what I read, it was not mentioned. So every Tom, Dick and
Julian can have an opinion, but should they be allowed to
ruin or tarnish what was a rather more fitting and proper
affair.
 
From:
[mailto:]
On Behalf Of pansydobersby
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 12:43 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re:
Daily Mirror
 
 
Oh, I say, Paul - I have never watched 'Downton Abbey',
but surely 'Gosford Park' was marvellous?
 
I don't know about Fellowes part of
his ancestry, but he's descended from Anne St Leger, I
believe.
 
Pansy

I have to admit, I was surprised that he was so civil. I do suspect this might be because there were quite a few complaints. Anyway, wishing you all a very Happy Easter!Nico On Thursday, 2 April 2015, 20:15, "Paul Trevor Bale bale475@... []" <> wrote:
I don't think he is a scholar of anything much, certainly not of
history, and definitely not of the fifteenth century, those plays
being his only source it appears.
I too have no idea why he was on the programme, nor Robert Lindsay
for that matter, who looked bored stiff during the service. So many
more deserving of his seat in the cathedral.
Paul


On 02/04/2015 19:14, Pamela Bain
pbain@... [] wrote:
I
am or was addicted to Downton Abbey, PBS said Season 6 will
be the absolute last one. I also loved Gosford Park.
However, I was shocked to see Sir Julian as a speaker at
the RIII re-interment. I wondered if he was a scholar of
that period of history as well as a writer/producer. From
what I read, it was not mentioned. So every Tom, Dick and
Julian can have an opinion, but should they be allowed to
ruin or tarnish what was a rather more fitting and proper
affair.
From:
[mailto:]
On Behalf Of pansydobersby
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 12:43 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re:
Daily Mirror
Oh, I say, Paul - I have never watched 'Downton Abbey',
but surely 'Gosford Park' was marvellous?
I don't know about Fellowes part of
his ancestry, but he's descended from Anne St Leger, I
believe.
Pansy

Seems like there was some of 'anyone who is anyone' was invited to attend. On Friday, 3 April 2015, 3:15, "Paul Trevor Bale bale475@... []" <> wrote:
I don't think he is a scholar of anything much, certainly not of
history, and definitely not of the fifteenth century, those plays
being his only source it appears.
I too have no idea why he was on the programme, nor Robert Lindsay
for that matter, who looked bored stiff during the service. So many
more deserving of his seat in the cathedral.
Paul


On 02/04/2015 19:14, Pamela Bain
pbain@... [] wrote:
I
am or was addicted to Downton Abbey, PBS said Season 6 will
be the absolute last one. I also loved Gosford Park.
However, I was shocked to see Sir Julian as a speaker at
the RIII re-interment. I wondered if he was a scholar of
that period of history as well as a writer/producer. From
what I read, it was not mentioned. So every Tom, Dick and
Julian can have an opinion, but should they be allowed to
ruin or tarnish what was a rather more fitting and proper
affair.
From:
[mailto:]
On Behalf Of pansydobersby
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 12:43 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re:
Daily Mirror
Oh, I say, Paul - I have never watched 'Downton Abbey',
but surely 'Gosford Park' was marvellous?
I don't know about Fellowes part of
his ancestry, but he's descended from Anne St Leger, I
believe.
Pansy

First, I am surprised anyone here attributes any journalist from the Daily Rags with any sort of intelligence or knowledge of history or the truth. Journalists don't care about the truth, just their warped version of it. But well done for emailing the Daily Mail to correct them.Even if Richard III had all of the so called infirmities and deformities that Shakespeare said he had, so what? That is of course proof that he killed the Princes. or what about another criteria used in history to rate people and their intelligence or if they are evil or not: the early misuse of genetic types. In the late nineteenth century and up to the second world war so called genetic scientists were trotting out the bullshit later appropriated by the Nazis. Your head is a certain shape, your skull too small or too large, eyes too deep set and so on, you have so many bumps on your cranial, and so on to define if someone was guilty or innocent of murder. Later they used this to say the working classes and some people with mental handicap should not have children and then it was taken to its evil ends, the racial typing and purity beliefs of the Nazies inherited from Egyptologists. This was a misuse and abuse of the early work of course but in some terrible ways it reflects the ways that some skeletal deformities and disablities were judged in the Middle Ages. It reflects the way that the ignorant and even the educated over the centuries have used Richard's curved spine, possibly visible for the first time in public after Bosworth as he was tragically led back into the city on a horse, to paint him wrongly as a monster. Sadly this as we have seen this week has continued, despite us attempting to educate people to the truth and lay Richard to rest with dignity and respect. But then the media have no idea whatsoever and are not likely to do any proper research into either Richard as a person or into the sources about the disappearance of Prince Richard and Edward V in the royal palace, not prison of the Tower of London. Did you know that actually not all societies viewed disability or being deformed as a curse or a sign of God's wrath. I did my dissertation on the social and historical costs of disability and researched the historical setting and attitudes and how they still impact on disabled people today throughly. Many ancient societies had a mixed attitude. Injuries for example were seen to be something of honour and pride, birth defects were mostly seen as a curse, but not all societies exposed babies. In Medieval Scandanavia, some forms of curviture were seen as a blessing and people came to such people for advice and made them leaders of their communities. In the sixteenth century in Switzaland and other Alpine regions, they actually knew the cause of facial deformities that were known as cretanism. They knew that it was caused by the rich minirals in the water and the rocks. They did not fear children born with varied signs of cretanism, in fact such children were precious and a blessing. It became so common in some villages that it was considered to be a sign of disfavour if your child was born what we would call normal. Each family prayed that at least one member of the family would have this facial deformity. Dis you know that one of the most revered Queens of France had a curved spine and was not feared or called a monster and it was known that she had this condition? Claude of France, the well educated and very well respected Queen of Francis I had a condition, similar to Richard III and was described as wise, beautiful, charming, educated, sophisticated, morally upright, pius, and many ambassadors wrote favourably of her. She had eight children, five of whom lived to be adults. Sadly she died in her late 20s. So why treat Richard the way they did?Answer: Richard was the Tudor fall guy. Richard was the enemy as far as Henry Tudor and his followers were concerned; the propaganda that Richard and Tudor put out about each other was not unexpectably unflattering; the Tudors as the victors felt they had to continue this campaign to justify their own brand new stance on the throne. Seeing Richard's back for the first time; probably exaggerated as he was placed over the horse in such a way to make it visible to all; the followers could make fun of his disability by laughing and beefing it up and humiliation of their defeated quarry. Henry may have given orders to make sure all saw the curvature and then this was used later by propaganda to paint Richard as a killer and a monster. The writers that made this worse were doing so to please a Tudor mob. Those who had supported Richard as he rode out of Leicester may have watched horrified and in silence as he was brought back into the city, but the men with Tudor, many of them foreigners and his killers would have been making terrible scornful noises and we have seen the terrible and sickening wound one inflicted. Had Richard won at Bosworth and gone on to be a successful and good King his curved spine would be a mere footnote in history.Journalists have a place in reporting the important things, political scandals, terrorism, strikes, industrial accidents, plane crashes, murder, corruption, and so on, they should not impose their views on history if they know nothing about the subject but what has been repeated to them by the ignorant.

What a fabulous and fantastic posting Poohlandeva.I did my "major project" for my Fdn Degree on The History of Special Needs Education, so although less detailed and at a lower level than your dissertation there are similarities of topic.It is a matter of national and international shame, how many of our disabled brothers and sisters have been treated over the centuries, and the misperceptions that have been held about them.Apart from minute differences between idiots, imbeciles, and the feeble minded I was surprised to find that it was a Christian duty to assist and support the blind, whereas the deaf were just regarded as stupid and were therefore condemned.It is a big subject deserving of further research, and your wonderful post was a great contribution.JessFrom: poohlandevaSent: 03/04/2015 07:11To: Subject: Re: Daily Mirror
First, I am surprised anyone here attributes any journalist from the Daily Rags with any sort of intelligence or knowledge of history or the truth. Journalists don't care about the truth, just their warped version of it. But well done for emailing the Daily Mail to correct them.Even if Richard III had all of the so called infirmities and deformities that Shakespeare said he had, so what? That is of course proof that he killed the Princes. or what about another criteria used in history to rate people and their intelligence or if they are evil or not: the early misuse of genetic types. In the late nineteenth century and up to the second world war so called genetic scientists were trotting out the bullshit later appropriated by the Nazis. Your head is a certain shape, your skull too small or too large, eyes too deep set and so on, you have so many bumps on your cranial, and so on to define if someone was guilty or innocent of murder. Later they used this to say the working classes and some people with mental handicap should not have children and then it was taken to its evil ends, the racial typing and purity beliefs of the Nazies inherited from Egyptologists. This was a misuse and abuse of the early work of course but in some terrible ways it reflects the ways that some skeletal deformities and disablities were judged in the Middle Ages. It reflects the way that the ignorant and even the educated over the centuries have used Richard's curved spine, possibly visible for the first time in public after Bosworth as he was tragically led back into the city on a horse, to paint him wrongly as a monster. Sadly this as we have seen this week has continued, despite us attempting to educate people to the truth and lay Richard to rest with dignity and respect. But then the media have no idea whatsoever and are not likely to do any proper research into either Richard as a person or into the sources about the disappearance of Prince Richard and Edward V in the royal palace, not prison of the Tower of London. Did you know that actually not all societies viewed disability or being deformed as a curse or a sign of God's wrath. I did my dissertation on the social and historical costs of disability and researched the historical setting and attitudes and how they still impact on disabled people today throughly. Many ancient societies had a mixed attitude. Injuries for example were seen to be something of honour and pride, birth defects were mostly seen as a curse, but not all societies exposed babies. In Medieval Scandanavia, some forms of curviture were seen as a blessing and people came to such people for advice and made them leaders of their communities. In the sixteenth century in Switzaland and other Alpine regions, they actually knew the cause of facial deformities that were known as cretanism. They knew that it was caused by the rich minirals in the water and the rocks. They did not fear children born with varied signs of cretanism, in fact such children were precious and a blessing. It became so common in some villages that it was considered to be a sign of disfavour if your child was born what we would call normal. Each family prayed that at least one member of the family would have this facial deformity. Dis you know that one of the most revered Queens of France had a curved spine and was not feared or called a monster and it was known that she had this condition? Claude of France, the well educated and very well respected Queen of Francis I had a condition, similar to Richard III and was described as wise, beautiful, charming, educated, sophisticated, morally upright, pius, and many ambassadors wrote favourably of her. She had eight children, five of whom lived to be adults. Sadly she died in her late 20s. So why treat Richard the way they did?Answer: Richard was the Tudor fall guy. Richard was the enemy as far as Henry Tudor and his followers were concerned; the propaganda that Richard and Tudor put out about each other was not unexpectably unflattering; the Tudors as the victors felt they had to continue this campaign to justify their own brand new stance on the throne. Seeing Richard's back for the first time; probably exaggerated as he was placed over the horse in such a way to make it visible to all; the followers could make fun of his disability by laughing and beefing it up and humiliation of their defeated quarry. Henry may have given orders to make sure all saw the curvature and then this was used later by propaganda to paint Richard as a killer and a monster. The writers that made this worse were doing so to please a Tudor mob. Those who had supported Richard as he rode out of Leicester may have watched horrified and in silence as he was brought back into the city, but the men with Tudor, many of them foreigners and his killers would have been making terrible scornful noises and we have seen the terrible and sickening wound one inflicted. Had Richard won at Bosworth and gone on to be a successful and good King his curved spine would be a mere footnote in history.Journalists have a place in reporting the important things, political scandals, terrorism, strikes, industrial accidents, plane crashes, murder, corruption, and so on, they should not impose their views on history if they know nothing about the subject but what has been repeated to them by the ignorant.

I agree, and am impressed with both posts. I wonder how many people were born with or developed a physical infirmity? Thinking about the diet of the times, not much milk, cheese, but how much? Eating heavy foods if you were wealthy, and if not, pretty
basic. That alone could have affected the bones. Again, I have done less than no research, so am speculating.



On Apr 3, 2015, at 4:10 AM, Janjovian janjovian@... [] <> wrote:


What a fabulous and fantastic posting Poohlandeva.
I did my "major project" for my Fdn Degree on The History of Special Needs Education, so although less detailed and at a lower level than your dissertation there are similarities of topic.
It is a matter of national and international shame, how many of our disabled brothers and sisters have been treated over the centuries, and the misperceptions that have been held about them.
Apart from minute differences between idiots, imbeciles, and the feeble minded I was surprised to find that it was a Christian duty to assist and support the blind, whereas the deaf were just regarded as stupid and were therefore condemned.
It is a big subject deserving of further research, and your wonderful post was a great contribution.

Jess
From:
poohlandeva
Sent:
03/04/2015 07:11
To:

Subject:
Re: Daily Mirror

First, I am surprised anyone here attributes any journalist from the Daily Rags with any sort of intelligence or knowledge of history or the truth. Journalists don't care about the truth, just their warped version of it. But well done for emailing the
Daily Mail to correct them.

Even if Richard III had all of the so called infirmities and deformities that Shakespeare said he had, so what? That is of course proof that he killed the Princes. or what about another criteria used in history to rate people and their intelligence or
if they are evil or not: the early misuse of genetic types. In the late nineteenth century and up to the second world war so called genetic scientists were trotting out the bullshit later appropriated by the Nazis. Your head is a certain shape, your skull
too small or too large, eyes too deep set and so on, you have so many bumps on your cranial, and so on to define if someone was guilty or innocent of murder. Later they used this to say the working classes and some people with mental handicap should not have
children and then it was taken to its evil ends, the racial typing and purity beliefs of the Nazies inherited from Egyptologists. This was a misuse and abuse of the early work of course but in some terrible ways it reflects the ways that some skeletal deformities
and disablities were judged in the Middle Ages. It reflects the way that the ignorant and even the educated over the centuries have used Richard's curved spine, possibly visible for the first time in public after Bosworth as he was tragically led back into
the city on a horse, to paint him wrongly as a monster. Sadly this as we have seen this week has continued, despite us attempting to educate people to the truth and lay Richard to rest with dignity and respect. But then the media have no idea whatsoever
and are not likely to do any proper research into either Richard as a person or into the sources about the disappearance of Prince Richard and Edward V in the royal palace, not prison of the Tower of London.

Did you know that actually not all societies viewed disability or being deformed as a curse or a sign of God's wrath. I did my dissertation on the social and historical costs of disability and researched the historical setting and attitudes and how they
still impact on disabled people today throughly. Many ancient societies had a mixed attitude. Injuries for example were seen to be something of honour and pride, birth defects were mostly seen as a curse, but not all societies exposed babies. In Medieval
Scandanavia, some forms of curviture were seen as a blessing and people came to such people for advice and made them leaders of their communities. In the sixteenth century in Switzaland and other Alpine regions, they actually knew the cause of facial deformities
that were known as cretanism. They knew that it was caused by the rich minirals in the water and the rocks. They did not fear children born with varied signs of cretanism, in fact such children were precious and a blessing. It became so common in some villages
that it was considered to be a sign of disfavour if your child was born what we would call normal. Each family prayed that at least one member of the family would have this facial deformity.

Dis you know that one of the most revered Queens of France had a curved spine and was not feared or called a monster and it was known that she had this condition? Claude of France, the well educated and very well respected Queen of Francis I had a condition,
similar to Richard III and was described as wise, beautiful, charming, educated, sophisticated, morally upright, pius, and many ambassadors wrote favourably of her. She had eight children, five of whom lived to be adults. Sadly she died in her late 20s.
So why treat Richard the way they did?

Answer: Richard was the Tudor fall guy. Richard was the enemy as far as Henry Tudor and his followers were concerned; the propaganda that Richard and Tudor put out about each other was not unexpectably unflattering; the Tudors as the victors felt they
had to continue this campaign to justify their own brand new stance on the throne. Seeing Richard's back for the first time; probably exaggerated as he was placed over the horse in such a way to make it visible to all; the followers could make fun of his
disability by laughing and beefing it up and humiliation of their defeated quarry. Henry may have given orders to make sure all saw the curvature and then this was used later by propaganda to paint Richard as a killer and a monster. The writers that made
this worse were doing so to please a Tudor mob. Those who had supported Richard as he rode out of Leicester may have watched horrified and in silence as he was brought back into the city, but the men with Tudor, many of them foreigners and his killers would
have been making terrible scornful noises and we have seen the terrible and sickening wound one inflicted. Had Richard won at Bosworth and gone on to be a successful and good King his curved spine would be a mere footnote in history.

Journalists have a place in reporting the important things, political scandals, terrorism, strikes, industrial accidents, plane crashes, murder, corruption, and so on, they should not impose their views on history if they know nothing about the subject
but what has been repeated to them by the ignorant.

Thanks Jess, if I can help further let me know. Sorry have not acknowledged your wonderful comment but have been at the hospital for the last three weeks as my husband was serious ill. He is still in the hospital but is slowly getting better. Thanks for your kind words.

Wishing your husband a speedy recovery.We are in a similar situation.My husbands 93 year old mother is very ill in hospital.There has been a bit of ambulance calling and a lot of hospital visiting going on.xxxJessFrom: poohlandevaSent: 30/04/2015 16:29To: Subject: Re: Daily Mirror
Thanks Jess, if I can help further let me know. Sorry have not acknowledged your wonderful comment but have been at the hospital for the last three weeks as my husband was serious ill. He is still in the hospital but is slowly getting better. Thanks for your kind words.

Oh my, it must be the season. I took my 89 year old Mother to the doctor on Tuesday. JUST bronchitis, but yes, heart palpitations! Wishing everyone, and every
member of the family, better health.

From: [mailto:]

Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 11:18 AM
To:
Subject: RE: Re: Daily Mirror


Wishing your husband a speedy recovery.
We are in a similar situation.
My husbands 93 year old mother is very ill in hospital.
There has been a bit of ambulance calling and a lot of hospital visiting going on.

xxxJess
From:
poohlandeva
Sent: 30/04/2015 16:29
To:
Subject:
Re: Daily Mirror

Thanks Jess, if I can help further let me know. Sorry have not acknowledged your wonderful comment but have been at the hospital for the last three weeks as my husband was serious ill. He is still in the hospital but is slowly getting better. Thanks for
your kind words.