Students attack Prince Charles' car after fee hike

Not a good time to go to Britain then, what with the cold snap and Camilla's even colder sense of humour.

---

Furious student protesters attacked a car carrying Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla, vandalized buildings and battled riot police Thursday as a controversial hike in university fees triggered Britain's worst political violence in years.

In a major security breach, demonstrators set upon the heir to the throne's Rolls Royce as it drove through London's busy West End on its way to a theater. A group of up to 20 struck it with fists, sticks and bottles, breaking a window and splattering the gleaming black vehicle with paint.

In the frenzy, some chanted "off with their heads!"

Adnan Nazir, a 23-year-old podiatrist who was following the protesters, said Charles, 62, kept his calm, gently pushing his 63-year-old wife toward the floor to get her out of the line of fire.

"Charles got her on the floor and put his hands on her," Nazir said. "Charles was still waving and giving the thumb's up.

"It was just a surreal thing," he said. "It was completely manic."

Charles' office, Clarence House, said the royal couple was unharmed. But the attack took police completely by surprise and raises serious security questions.

The chief of the Metropolitan Police, Paul Stephenson, said the force would launch an investigation into Thursday's violence.

Prime Minister David Cameron said the violence against the royal couple was "shocking and regrettable."

"It is clear that a minority of protesters came determined to provoke violence, attack the police and cause as much damage to property as possible," Cameron said. "They must face the full force of the law."

Police said it was unclear whether the royals had been deliberately targeted, or were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The couple arrived looking somber but composed at the London Palladium theater, where they were attending a Royal Variety Performance.

Camilla later managed to shrug off the ordeal, saying there was "a first time for everything," the Press Association news agency reported.

---

http://www.mail.com/intl/Article.aspx/world/europe/APNews/Europe/20101210/U_EU-Britain-Tuition-Tangle?pageid=1

England in the 1500s

Most people got married in June because they took their yearly bath in May and still smelled pretty good by June. However, they were starting to smell, so brides carried a bouquet of flowers to hide the body odour. Hence the custom today of carrying a bouquet when getting married.

Baths consisted of a big tub filled with hot water. The man of the house had the privilege of the nice clean water, then all the other sons and men, then the women and finally the children. Last of all the babies. By then the water was so dirty you could actually lose someone in it. Hence the saying, “Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.”

Houses had thatched roofs-thick straw-piled high, with no wood underneath. It was the only place for animals to get warm, so all the cats and other small animals (mice, bugs) lived in the roof. When it rained it became slippery and sometimes the animals would slip and fall off the roof. Hence the saying, “It's raining cats and dogs.”

There was nothing to stop things from falling into the house. This posed a real problem in the bedroom where bugs and other droppings could mess up your nice clean bed. Hence, a bed with big posts and a sheet hung over the top afforded some protection. That's how four-poster canopy beds came into existence.

The floor was dirt. Only the wealthy had something other than dirt. Hence the saying, “Dirt poor.” The wealthy had slate floors that would get slippery in the winter when wet, so they spread thresh (straw) on floor to help keep their footing. As the winter wore on, they added more thresh until, when you opened the door, it would all start slipping outside. A piece of wood was placed in the entranceway. Hence the saying “a thresh hold.”

In those old days, they cooked in the kitchen with a big kettle that always hung over the fire. Every day they lit the fire and added things to the pot. They ate mostly vegetables and did not get much meat. They would eat the stew for dinner, leaving leftovers in the pot to get cold overnight and then start over the next day. Sometimes stew had food in it that had been there for quite a while. Hence the rhyme, “Peas porridge hot, peas porridge cold, peas porridge in the pot nine days old.”

Sometimes they could obtain pork, which made them feel quite special. When visitors came over, they would hang up their bacon to show off. It was a sign of wealth that a man could, bring home the bacon. They would cut off a little to share with guests and would all sit around and chew the fat.

Those with money had plates made of pewter. Food with high acid content caused some of the lead to leach onto the food, causing lead poisoning death. This happened most often with tomatoes, so for the next 400 years or so, tomatoes were considered poisonous.

Bread was divided according to status. Workers got the burnt bottom of the loaf, the family got the middle, and guests got the top, or the upper crust.

Lead cups were used to drink ale or whiskey. The combination would sometimes knock the imbibers out for a couple of days. Someone walking along the road would take them for dead and prepare them for burial. They were laid out on the kitchen table for a couple of days and the family would gather around and eat and drink and wait and see if they would wake up. Hence the custom of holding a wake.

England is old and small and the local folks started running out of places to bury people. So they would dig up coffins and would take the bones to a bone-house, and reuse the grave. When reopening these coffins, 1 out of 25 coffins were found to have scratch marks on the inside and they realized they had been burying people alive. So they would tie a string on the wrist of the corpse, lead it through the coffin and up through the ground and tie it to a bell. Someone would have to sit out in the graveyard all night (the graveyard shift) to listen for the bell; thus, someone could be, saved by the bell or was considered a dead ringer.

Angry Arsenal blasts former referee Poll

Arsene Wenger has launched a scathing attack on former referee Graham Poll and has described him as an embarrassment following comments made this week.

Speaking on Setanta Sports on their Football Matters, Poll backed up Howard Webb's decision to send off Emmanuel Adebayor against Liverpool - but it was his analysis of John Terry's red card at Everton that angered Arsenal manager Wenger.

Poll, a former FIFA referee who retired in 2007, suggested that referees could be influenced by the furore that comes with sending off the England captain.

"For me it was embarrassing when you listen to that," Wenger said. "They ask whether it was a sending off or not. He says you have to consider that you are sending off the captain of the national team.

"What has that got to do with the rulebook? The rulebook doesn't look at passports. When you listen to that it is embarrassing for the referees.

"Is it a sending off or not? Are you from England or not from England? Are you 17 or 30? It has nothing to do with that.

"It is a big concern when you here the national number one referee talk like that."

Wenger admits his faith in referees has been tested by Poll's comments.

"I do not think (they are taking reputations into account) but when I hear statements like that, it makes you change your mind," he added.
Source: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=605099&sec=england&cc=4716
----------

Totally agree with Wenger. The presumed impartiality of referees is not something you should even question, But then again, this is not the first time "rent-a-quote" Graham has put his foot in his mouth.

Cravat

The cravat is a neckband, the forerunner of the modern tailored necktie and bow tie. From the end of the 16th century, the term "band" applied to any long-strip neckcloth that was not a "ruff." The ruff, a starched, pleated white linen strip, started its fashion career earlier in the 16th century as a neckcloth (readily changeable, to minimize the soiling of a doublet), as a bib, or as a napkin. A "band" could indicate either a plain, attached shirt collar or a detachable "falling band" that draped over the doublet collar. It is possible that cravats were initially worn to hide shirts which were not immaculately clean.

The modern cravat originated in the 1630s; like most men's fashions between the 17th century and World War I, it was of military origin. In the reign of France's Louis XIII, Croatian mercenaries were enlisted into a regiment supporting the King and Cardinal Richelieu against the Duc de Guise and the Queen Mother, Marie de Medici. The traditional Croat military kit aroused Parisian curiosity about the unusual, picturesque scarves distinctively knotted at the Croats' necks; the cloths that were used, ranged from the coarse cloths of enlisted soldiers, to the fine linens and silks of the officers. The sartorial word "cravat" derives from the French "cravate," a corrupt French pronunciation of "Croat" — in Croatian, "Hrvat".

Considering the interdependence of many European regions (particularly the French) with the Venetian Republic, which occupied most of Croatia's coast, and the word's uncertain philologic origin, the new male neckdress was known as a cravate. The French readily switched from old-fashioned starched linen ruffs to the new loose linen and muslin cravates; the military styles often had broad, laced edges, while a gentleman's cravat could be of fine lace. As an extreme example of the style, the sculptor Grinling Gibbons carved a realistic cravat in white limewood which is now on display at the Victoria and Albert Museum.

On returning to England from exile in 1660, Charles II imported with him the latest new word in fashion:

"A cravatte is another kind of adornment for the neck being nothing else but a long towel put about the Collar, and so tyed before with a Bow Knott; this is the original of all such Wearings; but now by the Art and Inventions of the seamsters, there is so many new ways of making them, that it would be a task to name, much more to describe them". (Randle Holme, Academy of Armory and Blazon, 1688.)

During the wars of Louis XIV of 1689–1697, except for court, the flowing cravat was replaced with the more current and equally military "Steinkirk", named after the Battle of Steenkerque in 1692. The Steinkirk was a long, narrow, plain or lightly trimmed neckcloth worn with military dress, wrapped once about the neck in a loose knot, with the lace of fringed ends twisted together and tucked out of the way into a button-hole, either of the coat or the waistcoat. The steinkirk was popular with men and women until the 1720s.

The maccaronis reintroduced the flowing cravat in the 1770s, and the manner of a man's knotting it became indicative of his taste and style, to the extent that after the Battle of Waterloo (1815) the cravat, itself, was referred to as a "tie".

Oxford compiles list of top ten irritating phrases by Charlotte Bailey, Telegraph.co.uk

Heading the list was the expression 'at the end of the day', which was followed in second place by the phrase 'fairly unique'.

The tautological statement "I personally" made third place – an expression that BBC Radio 4 presenter John Humphreys has described as "the linguistic equivalent of having chips with rice."

Also making the top 10 is the grammatically incorrect "shouldn't of", instead of "shouldn't have".

The phrases appear in a book called Damp Squid, named after the mistake of confusing a squid with a squib, a type of firework.

The researchers who compiled the list monitor the use of phrases in a database called the Oxford University Corpus, which comprises books, papers, magazines, broadcast, the internet and other sources.

The database alerts them to new words and phrases and can tell them which expressions are disappearing. It also shows how words are being misused.

As well as the above expressions, the book's author Jeremy Butterfield says that many annoyingly over-used expressions actually began as office lingo, such as 24/7 and "synergy".

Other phrases to irritate people are "literally" and "ironically", when they are used out of context.

Mr Butterfield said: "We grow tired of anything that is repeated too often – an anecdote, a joke, a mannerism – and the same seems to happen with some language."

The top ten most irritating phrases:
1 - At the end of the day
2 - Fairly unique
3 - I personally
4 - At this moment in time
5 - With all due respect
6 - Absolutely
7 - It's a nightmare
8 - Shouldn't of
9 - 24/7
10 - It's not rocket science
---------

Should add my own:
1. To be honest
2. At this junction
3. Mul-tai as opposed to mul-tee
4. In my own personal opinion
5. No harm done
6. That's what I'm about
7. Anything Joey Barton says
8. There's never an easy game
9. Get his head examined
10. Hold my hands up
11. Anchor
12. Unpack
13. Framework
14. Hopefully (used in lieu of 'I hope')
15. Minimum spend of

Fornication Under Consent of the King

In ancient England, people could not have sex without consent from the King. When people wanted to have a child, they had to solicit permission from the monarchy. In turn, they would supply a plaque to hang on their door when they had sexual relations.

The plaque read: "Fornication Under Consent of the King". I'm sure you can put it together.

Belarus 1-3 England

World's worst roundabouts

Magic Roundabout in Swindon, England


Turbo Roundabout in Holland

Croatia 1-4 Ingerlund

Whodathunkit? England demolish Croatia to exact some measure of revenge for the Euro 08 capitulation - and how. A hat-trick from Theo "not-good-enough-for-Arsenal-but-good-enough-for-England" Walcott knocked the stuffing out of Slaven Bilic's men, with Rooney a key architect. Theo "I-went-to-World-Cup-2006-and-all-I-got-was-this-lousy-T-shirt" Walcott - Wal-Cott for the World Cup! (read this out and you can hear the pun =] )

Euro 2008

Has this been the best tournament so far? Absolutely. Dramatic late goals, remarkable upsets, stunning strikes, and all this with supposedly jaded players and no England!

Holland, Croatia and Turkey have been an absolute revelation in Austria-Switzerland, and you never know quite what to expect from each match.

Take the latest one, for instance. Czech Republic were 2-0 up and cruising when Turkey's Arda Turan showed a remarkably cool 21-year-old head to pick his spot low inside Petr Cech's near post.

Then Nihat Kahveci pounced on Cech's flap at a cross to pull Turkey level. Best keeper in the world? You're having a laugh. Look no further than Edwin van der Sar.

Finally, Nihat broke the despondent Czech offside trap to curl an absolute beauty outside of Cech's reach, off the crossbar and in the top corner.

And I'll tell you what: this isn't and won't be the most dramatic match so far. Arjen Robben's immediate riposte to Thierry Henry's goal in Holland's 4-1 win over France comes to mind. Wesley Sneijder's stunning last-minute goal was a thing to behold. Sneijder for Ronaldo anyone? Croatia's 2-0 ousting of favourites Germany?

This has been a dream of a tournament.

Sad, sad England

And so England are out of Euro 2008 before it's even started. What strikes me is how apathetic I am towards their fate, despite being an England fan. Mostly it's due to the fact that don't deserve to be there based on their capitulations in the matches that mattered.

And so I now begin the unenviable task of finding an alternative team next year.

On another note, why not Raddy Avramovic for England manager?