In article <vu3s00pibevlhaaa359c3c3l5arm2nj0s2@4ax.com>, THE Old Man 
<ddale1232@bellsouth.net> writes
>On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 14:35:41 +1300, "Adam Whyte-Settlar"
><grawillers@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Duke of URL" <macbenahATkdsiDOTnet> wrote in message
>>news:100q8o4jsnf0s4c@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>> Experience proves that the man who obstructs a war in which his nation
>>> is engaged, no matter whether right or wrong, occupies no enviable
>>> place in life or history. Better for him, individually, to advocate
>>> "war, pestilence and famine," than to act as obstructionist to a war
>>> already begun.
>>
>>Hitler would agree wholeheartedly.
>>'no matter whether right or wrong' eh?
>>Interesting.
>>
>>Not entirely relevant to what I was asking however - I am just curious as to
>>at which point a 'bellyacher' becomes an 'America hater' and thence
>>deserving of exile to some mythical colony.
>>Apparently high treason isn't strictly necessary to qualify.
>>A W-S
>>
>>
>>
>Speaking of Hitler, which we weren't, there was a piece in the news
>today that Winston Churchill's Macaw, Charlie, is still alive at 104.
>He is the bird that had a good vocabulary and most of it was cussing
>Hitler and calling him names.
>
The piece I read in the newspaper today expressed some doubt as to 
whether it was Churchill's parrot, under the headline "Parrot swears he 
was once Churchill's"! Despite claims by the current owners that the 
parrot learnt its large vocabulary of swear words from Churchill, there 
is, apparently, no record at all that Churchill ever owned a parrot. 
Pity, really, because it is a very good story!

-- 
Malcolm Ogilvie