Subject: | Re: [OM] seen by a Canon |
---|---|
From: | Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:25:11 +1100 |
He was at The Independent - they haven't got fraction of the resources and Fisk is a w**ker. You mean Rupert has a line? Oh, of course - the bottom line... Andrew Fildes afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On 11/12/2009, at 5:41 PM, Chris Barker wrote: > Mind you I wouldn't touch the Times or its stablemates Sun and News > of the Screws (Private Eye nomenclature) since they each follow the > Murdoch line so strictly and are BBC-haters. > > The Independent is still OK ... -- _________________________________________________________________ Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/ Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/ |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [OM] Scanning [Was - The Eye In The Woods], C.H.Ling |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [OM] seen by a Canon, JOHN DUGGAN |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [OM] seen by a Canon, Chris Barker |
Next by Thread: | Re: [OM] seen by a Canon, JOHN DUGGAN |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |