Re: Katie Hopkins
- From: "Jeff Lawrence" <jeff.lawrence2@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 19:04:34 +0100
"Jeff Lawrence" <jeff.lawrence2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:47486585$0$52909$dbd4b001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You've never really got over that business about Inca writing and the
significance of those coloured bits of string yet, have you, eh?
What with you claiming to know all about it, as well.
Eh, I've never claimed to be an expert on the subject. I've certainly
never pretended to "know all about it". It's just something I've read
quite a bit about and formed an opinion on because of
this reading. It doesn't mean it's right, or wrong. The thing is no-one
really knows what the truth is yet and everyone can only express theories.
You have a theory, I have a different theory.
Until it is proved one way or the other neither of us are right, or wrong.
And to be honest, I'd forgotten all about this business until you brought it
up. So it seems you are the one with the grudge. For whatever reason.
Cheers
Jeff
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Katie Hopkins
- From: michael adams
- Re: Katie Hopkins
- References:
- Katie Hopkins
- From: John Rowland
- Re: Katie Hopkins
- From: Alan Hope
- Re: Katie Hopkins
- From: John Rowland
- Re: Katie Hopkins
- From: Alan Hope
- Re: Katie Hopkins
- From: John Rowland
- Re: Katie Hopkins
- From: Jeff Lawrence
- Re: Katie Hopkins
- From: michael adams
- Re: Katie Hopkins
- From: Jeff Lawrence
- Katie Hopkins
- Prev by Date: Re: Time to ban fireworks
- Next by Date: Re: Katie Hopkins
- Previous by thread: Re: Katie Hopkins
- Next by thread: Re: Katie Hopkins
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading