READ WHAT MICHEL BOUCHER SAID ABOUT WOMEN AND BREAST CANCER---SHOCKING

Group: rec.food.cooking Date: Fri, Aug 20, 2004, 10:20pm (EDT+4) From:
(Michel=A0Boucher)
IMPORTANT BREAST CANCER HOSPITALIZATION BILL
With all due respect to cancer victims, this bill only applies to the 7%
of the world's population living within the confines of USAia, and even
more precisely to that part which is female (approx. 3.5001% of the
world's population). Perhaps next time you could be a bit more explicit
and save the remaining 93% of the world's population the trouble of
trying to figure what this is. Thank you.

From: (Spud 555)

Group: rec.food.cooking Date: Fri, Aug 20, 2004, 10:20pm (EDT+4) From:
(Michel=A0Boucher)
IMPORTANT BREAST CANCER HOSPITALIZATION BILL
With all due respect to cancer victims, this bill only applies to the 7%
of the world's population living within the confines of USAia, and even
more precisely to that part which is female (approx. 3.5001% of the
world's population). Perhaps next time you could be a bit more explicit
and save the remaining 93% of the world's population the trouble of
trying to figure what this is. Thank you.

Pish tosh, he was talking about a post in an international forum regarding a
bill that was exclusive to the USA. He said nothing about women and breast
cancer.

Ellen

From: (Spud 555)

Group: rec.food.cooking Date: Fri, Aug 20, 2004, 10:20pm (EDT+4) From:
(Michel=A0Boucher)
IMPORTANT BREAST CANCER HOSPITALIZATION BILL
With all due respect to cancer victims, this bill only applies to the 7%
of the world's population living within the confines of USAia, and even
more precisely to that part which is female (approx. 3.5001% of the
world's population). Perhaps next time you could be a bit more explicit
and save the remaining 93% of the world's population the trouble of
trying to figure what this is. Thank you.

Pish tosh, he was talking about a post in an international forum regarding a
bill that was exclusive to the USA. He said nothing about women and breast
cancer.

Ellen

(SportKite1) wrote in
:

From: (Spud 555)

Group: rec.food.cooking Date: Fri, Aug 20, 2004, 10:20pm (EDT+4)
From: (Michel=A0Boucher)
IMPORTANT BREAST CANCER HOSPITALIZATION BILL
With all due respect to cancer victims, this bill only applies to
the 7% of the world's population living within the confines of
USAia, and even more precisely to that part which is female
(approx. 3.5001% of the world's population). Perhaps next time you
could be a bit more explicit and save the remaining 93% of the
world's population the trouble of trying to figure what this is.
Thank you.

Pish tosh, he was talking about a post in an international forum
regarding a bill that was exclusive to the USA. He said nothing
about women and breast cancer.

Thank you. The voice of sanity prevails. Obviously, webTV is still
the hotbed of intellectual activity it has always been :-

--

German to Picasso in front of Guernica: Did you do this?
Picasso to German in front of Guernica: No, it was you.

(SportKite1) wrote in
:

From: (Spud 555)

Group: rec.food.cooking Date: Fri, Aug 20, 2004, 10:20pm (EDT+4)
From: (Michel=A0Boucher)
IMPORTANT BREAST CANCER HOSPITALIZATION BILL
With all due respect to cancer victims, this bill only applies to
the 7% of the world's population living within the confines of
USAia, and even more precisely to that part which is female
(approx. 3.5001% of the world's population). Perhaps next time you
could be a bit more explicit and save the remaining 93% of the
world's population the trouble of trying to figure what this is.
Thank you.

Pish tosh, he was talking about a post in an international forum
regarding a bill that was exclusive to the USA. He said nothing
about women and breast cancer.

Thank you. The voice of sanity prevails. Obviously, webTV is still
the hotbed of intellectual activity it has always been :-

--

German to Picasso in front of Guernica: Did you do this?
Picasso to German in front of Guernica: No, it was you.

On 24 Aug 2004 12:38:07 GMT, Michel Boucher
wrote:

(SportKite1) wrote in
:

From: (Spud 555)

Group: rec.food.cooking Date: Fri, Aug 20, 2004, 10:20pm (EDT+4)
From: (Michel=A0Boucher)
IMPORTANT BREAST CANCER HOSPITALIZATION BILL
With all due respect to cancer victims, this bill only applies to
the 7% of the world's population living within the confines of
USAia, and even more precisely to that part which is female
(approx. 3.5001% of the world's population). Perhaps next time you
could be a bit more explicit and save the remaining 93% of the
world's population the trouble of trying to figure what this is.
Thank you.

Pish tosh, he was talking about a post in an international forum
regarding a bill that was exclusive to the USA. He said nothing
about women and breast cancer.

Thank you. The voice of sanity prevails. Obviously, webTV is still
the hotbed of intellectual activity it has always been :-

--

Of course, you brought it on yourself with the "7% of the population,
etc. business." All you had to do was point out that he forgot to
mention it was a bill for the US. Nicely, of course. After all, you
are the author of the recent subjects "OT:Funny" and "OT:Funny will
offend right-wingers" (right-wingers? really? where? what country?
Ooops. When it suits you, we are supposed to know.) So it's not like
you are setting a good model with respect to targeting an audience for
OT posts or even keeping to appropriate subjects for this newsgroup.

The poor guy was trying to do a public service, whether or not it
applies to you. It seems likely that it applies to him in some way
and a little compassion is in order rather than peevishness because he
forgot to mention the country. It's a bit brutish to make fun of him
considering you have transgressed in the same way.

So, now what exactly was your complaint?

Sue(tm)
Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

On 24 Aug 2004 12:38:07 GMT, Michel Boucher
wrote:

(SportKite1) wrote in
:

From: (Spud 555)

Group: rec.food.cooking Date: Fri, Aug 20, 2004, 10:20pm (EDT+4)
From: (Michel=A0Boucher)
IMPORTANT BREAST CANCER HOSPITALIZATION BILL
With all due respect to cancer victims, this bill only applies to
the 7% of the world's population living within the confines of
USAia, and even more precisely to that part which is female
(approx. 3.5001% of the world's population). Perhaps next time you
could be a bit more explicit and save the remaining 93% of the
world's population the trouble of trying to figure what this is.
Thank you.

Pish tosh, he was talking about a post in an international forum
regarding a bill that was exclusive to the USA. He said nothing
about women and breast cancer.

Thank you. The voice of sanity prevails. Obviously, webTV is still
the hotbed of intellectual activity it has always been :-

--

Of course, you brought it on yourself with the "7% of the population,
etc. business." All you had to do was point out that he forgot to
mention it was a bill for the US. Nicely, of course. After all, you
are the author of the recent subjects "OT:Funny" and "OT:Funny will
offend right-wingers" (right-wingers? really? where? what country?
Ooops. When it suits you, we are supposed to know.) So it's not like
you are setting a good model with respect to targeting an audience for
OT posts or even keeping to appropriate subjects for this newsgroup.

The poor guy was trying to do a public service, whether or not it
applies to you. It seems likely that it applies to him in some way
and a little compassion is in order rather than peevishness because he
forgot to mention the country. It's a bit brutish to make fun of him
considering you have transgressed in the same way.

So, now what exactly was your complaint?

Sue(tm)
Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

On 8/23/2004, spud555 wrote:

READ WHAT MICHEL BOUCHER SAID ABOUT WOMEN AND BREAST CANCER---SHOCKING

I wasn't sure what part of Michel's post was SHOCKING. I took
you to mean that, in your opinion, Michel was being insensitive
to the plight of women with breast cancer. On the other hand,
maybe you were endorsing his attitude about USA-centric
posts.

I rarely agree with Michel's posts, but I seriously doubt that he
is insensitive on this subject. His point about USA-centric posts
has some merit, but I think the original poster wrote the post
in a typical usenet telegram style and was not intentionally out
to offend readers outside the US.

As Michel's posts go, I thought this was among his least obnoxious.

On 8/23/2004, spud555 wrote:

READ WHAT MICHEL BOUCHER SAID ABOUT WOMEN AND BREAST CANCER---SHOCKING

I wasn't sure what part of Michel's post was SHOCKING. I took
you to mean that, in your opinion, Michel was being insensitive
to the plight of women with breast cancer. On the other hand,
maybe you were endorsing his attitude about USA-centric
posts.

I rarely agree with Michel's posts, but I seriously doubt that he
is insensitive on this subject. His point about USA-centric posts
has some merit, but I think the original poster wrote the post
in a typical usenet telegram style and was not intentionally out
to offend readers outside the US.

As Michel's posts go, I thought this was among his least obnoxious.

(Curly Sue) wrote in
:

Of course, you brought it on yourself with the "7% of the
population, etc. business."

I see...so stating an obvious fact is "bringing it upon myself"?

The poor guy was trying to do a public service, whether or not it
applies to you. It seems likely that it applies to him in some
way and a little compassion is in order rather than peevishness
because he forgot to mention the country. It's a bit brutish to
make fun of him considering you have transgressed in the same
way.

Sorry, but I made NO fun of him in any way. Perhaps you thought
that, but none was intended and none was shown.

So, now what exactly was your complaint?

At this point, meddling busybodies...

--

German to Picasso in front of Guernica: Did you do this?
Picasso to German in front of Guernica: No, it was you.

(Kevintsheehy) wrote in
:

As Michel's posts go, I thought this was among his least
obnoxious.

High praise indeed. But obnoxious is as obnoxious reads. The
noseyparker index is running high right now on rfc, with a plethora
of "the usual buttinskis" who feel compelled to exposit ad nauseam
THEIR take on my response to a post by someone who has expressed no
further opinion on this subject, either for or against my suggestion.
I take silence to be support, but what the hey...

I call upon Patrick NY ) to come forward and
say whether he was deeply, moderately or not at all offended by my
request to be more precise in future. And I call upon the usual
buttinskis, and you know who you are, to keep quiet until we do hear
from Patrick NY ). If he is offended, I will
apologize to him, but to no one else.

Qu'on se le tienne pour dit.

--

German to Picasso in front of Guernica: Did you do this?
Picasso to German in front of Guernica: No, it was you.

(Kevintsheehy) wrote in
:

As Michel's posts go, I thought this was among his least
obnoxious.

High praise indeed. But obnoxious is as obnoxious reads. The
noseyparker index is running high right now on rfc, with a plethora
of "the usual buttinskis" who feel compelled to exposit ad nauseam
THEIR take on my response to a post by someone who has expressed no
further opinion on this subject, either for or against my suggestion.
I take silence to be support, but what the hey...

I call upon Patrick NY ) to come forward and
say whether he was deeply, moderately or not at all offended by my
request to be more precise in future. And I call upon the usual
buttinskis, and you know who you are, to keep quiet until we do hear
from Patrick NY ). If he is offended, I will
apologize to him, but to no one else.

Qu'on se le tienne pour dit.

--

German to Picasso in front of Guernica: Did you do this?
Picasso to German in front of Guernica: No, it was you.

In article ,
(Spud 555) wrote:

READ WHAT MICHEL BOUCHER SAID ABOUT WOMEN AND BREAST CANCER---SHOCKING


[snipped Michel's post]


I didn't find it the least bit shocking. It seemed like a very polite
(but sarcastic) reminder that not every reader in this group is from the
US.

--
Dan Abel
Sonoma State University
AIS

On 24 Aug 2004 16:00:03 GMT, Michel Boucher
wrote:

(Curly Sue) wrote in
:

Of course, you brought it on yourself with the "7% of the
population, etc. business."

I see...so stating an obvious fact is "bringing it upon myself"?

The poor guy was trying to do a public service, whether or not it
applies to you. It seems likely that it applies to him in some
way and a little compassion is in order rather than peevishness
because he forgot to mention the country. It's a bit brutish to
make fun of him considering you have transgressed in the same
way.

Sorry, but I made NO fun of him in any way. Perhaps you thought
that, but none was intended and none was shown.

So, now what exactly was your complaint?

At this point, meddling busybodies...

Perhaps if you had sent your statement of obvious fact to him by
e-mail instead of the newsgroup, the meddling busybodies wouldn't know
that you were being a "do-as-I-say-but-not-as-I-do" busybody yourself.

Sue(tm)
Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

On 24 Aug 2004 16:00:03 GMT, Michel Boucher
wrote:

(Curly Sue) wrote in
:

Of course, you brought it on yourself with the "7% of the
population, etc. business."

I see...so stating an obvious fact is "bringing it upon myself"?

The poor guy was trying to do a public service, whether or not it
applies to you. It seems likely that it applies to him in some
way and a little compassion is in order rather than peevishness
because he forgot to mention the country. It's a bit brutish to
make fun of him considering you have transgressed in the same
way.

Sorry, but I made NO fun of him in any way. Perhaps you thought
that, but none was intended and none was shown.

So, now what exactly was your complaint?

At this point, meddling busybodies...

Perhaps if you had sent your statement of obvious fact to him by
e-mail instead of the newsgroup, the meddling busybodies wouldn't know
that you were being a "do-as-I-say-but-not-as-I-do" busybody yourself.

Sue(tm)
Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!