Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
The ignorant won't rest until everyone is as dumb as they are. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:

>Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?

Missing context. What are one way and the other?
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

In article <79vssidmkcdrldssdkc2dakae662t2omjm@4ax.com>,
Tim Merrigan <tppm@ca.rr.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
>(The Doctor) wrote:
>
>>Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
>
>Missing context. What are one way and the other?

For me DW fans are non-conformant.

Most of them have a bit of the 4th Doctor/TB persona.

>--
>
>Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.
>
>Tim Merrigan
>
>--
>This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
>www.avg.com

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
The ignorant won't rest until everyone is as dumb as they are. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

In article <uql0ps$nup$19@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:

> Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?

What in the Wide Wide World Of Sports are you babbling about?

--
Let's go Brandon!

In article <urinhs$2m9si$5@dont-email.me>,
Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>In article <uql0ps$nup$19@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:
>
>> Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
>
>What in the Wide Wide World Of Sports are you babbling about?
>

Wrong station.

>--
>Let's go Brandon!
>

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:

>Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?

Actually, we do conform in one way. We all like Doctor Who.
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

Tim Merrigan wrote:

> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
> (The Doctor) wrote:
>
> > Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
>
> Actually, we do conform in one way. We all like Doctor Who.

Define "like" ! ;-)

In article <xn0oik5g5cketbt004@reader.xsnews.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>Tim Merrigan wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
>> (The Doctor) wrote:
>>
>> > Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
>>
>> Actually, we do conform in one way. We all like Doctor Who.
>
>Define "like" ! ;-)

I exlude the Timeless Child!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <kocqtipe3kr8dda96407pnanmv09f93112@4ax.com>,
Tim Merrigan <tppm@ca.rr.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
>(The Doctor) wrote:
>
>>Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
>
>Actually, we do conform in one way. We all like Doctor Who.

I cannot stand the Timeless Child!

>--
>
>Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.
>
>Tim Merrigan
>
>--
>This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
>www.avg.com

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <xn0oik5g5cketbt004@reader.xsnews.nl>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > Tim Merrigan wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC),
> doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca >> (The Doctor) wrote:
> >>
> >> > Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
> >>
> >> Actually, we do conform in one way. We all like Doctor Who.
> >
> > Define "like" ! ;-)
>
> I exlude the Timeless Child!

I exclude the Seventh Doctor... well, on TV anyway. McCoy didn't do
too bad in some of the Big Finish audios... and at least we didn't
have to see him!

In article <xn0oik65qclfsho001@reader.xsnews.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote:
>
>> In article <xn0oik5g5cketbt004@reader.xsnews.nl>,
>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> > Tim Merrigan wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC),
>> doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca >> (The Doctor) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
>> >>
>> >> Actually, we do conform in one way. We all like Doctor Who.
>> >
>> > Define "like" ! ;-)
>>
>> I exlude the Timeless Child!
>
>I exclude the Seventh Doctor... well, on TV anyway. McCoy didn't do
>too bad in some of the Big Finish audios... and at least we didn't
>have to see him!

IYIO!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 01:27:07 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:

>In article <kocqtipe3kr8dda96407pnanmv09f93112@4ax.com>,
>Tim Merrigan <tppm@ca.rr.com> wrote:
>>On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
>>(The Doctor) wrote:
>>
>>>Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
>>
>>Actually, we do conform in one way. We all like Doctor Who.
>
>I cannot stand the Timeless Child!

Details. Everybody has a favorite (and a least favorite), but in
general, we all like The Doctor, if we didn't we wouldn't be DW fans.
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 23:15:53 -0800
Tim Merrigan <tppm@ca.rr.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 01:27:07 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
> (The Doctor) wrote:
>
> >In article <kocqtipe3kr8dda96407pnanmv09f93112@4ax.com>,
> >Tim Merrigan <tppm@ca.rr.com> wrote:
> >>On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
> >>(The Doctor) wrote:
> >>
> >>>Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
> >>
> >>Actually, we do conform in one way. We all like Doctor Who.
> >
> >I cannot stand the Timeless Child!
>
> Details. Everybody has a favorite (and a least favorite), but in
> general, we all like The Doctor, if we didn't we wouldn't be DW fans.

And you all love xposting, it seems.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

In article <mp2rtipdm8tk0kvm0kuqjql43eldk8vcaf@4ax.com>,
Tim Merrigan <tppm@ca.rr.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 01:27:07 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
>(The Doctor) wrote:
>
>>In article <kocqtipe3kr8dda96407pnanmv09f93112@4ax.com>,
>>Tim Merrigan <tppm@ca.rr.com> wrote:
>>>On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:32 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
>>>(The Doctor) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Since when do Doctor Who fans conform in one way or the other?
>>>
>>>Actually, we do conform in one way. We all like Doctor Who.
>>
>>I cannot stand the Timeless Child!
>
>Details. Everybody has a favorite (and a least favorite), but in
>general, we all like The Doctor, if we didn't we wouldn't be DW fans.

The Timeless Child is so anti-Doctor Who , it takes a wrecking ball
to Doctor Who!

>--
>
>Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.
>
>Tim Merrigan
>
>--
>This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
>www.avg.com

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

Mickmane wrote:

> On 27.02.24, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > The Doctor wrote:
> >>
> >> I exlude the Timeless Child!
> >
> > I exclude the Seventh Doctor... well, on TV anyway. McCoy didn't
> > do too bad in some of the Big Finish audios... and at least we
> > didn't have to see him!
>
> I exclude the 11th Doctor. Starting with stuffing food into his
> mouth and then spitting it out again, and then continuing to pull
> a stupid face. That was not the Doctor!

Ha Ha... Matt Smith was good at the stupid face thing alright. He
just has that sort of face! :-)

> Totally ruined what had been my most favorite show to unwatchable.
> Took me years, and a friend suggesting I watch first episode with
> the 12th Doctor, until I eventually trudged through it.
>
> Everything that had made the series my absolute favorite was just
> wrong, missing.

We all exclude someone though... nobody can love every one of the
Doctor's incarnations. We all have our favourites and not so
favourites...

With the 11th Doctor it was the likes of Amy and Rory that spoilt
that era for me... plus the multi-coloured humpback Daleks! I did
like Matt's Doctor though.

In article <xn0oil1lids2c6o000@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>Mickmane wrote:
>
>> On 27.02.24, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> > The Doctor wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I exlude the Timeless Child!
>> >
>> > I exclude the Seventh Doctor... well, on TV anyway. McCoy didn't
>> > do too bad in some of the Big Finish audios... and at least we
>> > didn't have to see him!
>>
>> I exclude the 11th Doctor. Starting with stuffing food into his
>> mouth and then spitting it out again, and then continuing to pull
>> a stupid face. That was not the Doctor!
>
>Ha Ha... Matt Smith was good at the stupid face thing alright. He
>just has that sort of face! :-)
>
>> Totally ruined what had been my most favorite show to unwatchable.
>> Took me years, and a friend suggesting I watch first episode with
>> the 12th Doctor, until I eventually trudged through it.
>>
>> Everything that had made the series my absolute favorite was just
>> wrong, missing.
>
>We all exclude someone though... nobody can love every one of the
>Doctor's incarnations. We all have our favourites and not so
>favourites...
>
>With the 11th Doctor it was the likes of Amy and Rory that spoilt
>that era for me... plus the multi-coloured humpback Daleks! I did
>like Matt's Doctor though.
>

The Doctor's Wife introduced Chibnall to wreck the whole lore!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

Mickmane wrote:

> On 28.02.24, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>
> > With the 11th Doctor it was the likes of Amy and Rory that spoilt
> > that era for me... plus the multi-coloured humpback Daleks! I did
> > like Matt's Doctor though.
>
> I didn't mind Amy. What did they do that bugged you?

Amy started out fine in "The Eleventh Hour", but she turned out to
be a selfish spoilt brat who treated Rory like shit as her arc
developed. For me, Amy & Rory out-stayed their welcome and should
have moved on a lot sooner. (Rory especially, his dying and coming
back to life all the time was silly.)

I love Karen Gillan though, she's hot!
> Daleks always had some with different colours. I don't remember
> humpbacks. :)

Look again! :-)

A re-design made solely to sell toys.

The Last Doctor wrote:

> Mickmane <ATH@kruemel.org> wrote:
>
> > Daleks always had some with different colours. I don't remember
> > humpbacks. :)
>
> The episode was “Victory of the Daleks” and the new Daleks were
> larger and had a deeper rear half, and all in casings in bright
> primary colours. (I thought of them as Power Ranger Daleks at the
> time. They looked plasticky and designed specifically to become a
> line of toys.)
>
> The idea of the deep rear “hunchback” was that this would be
> storage for swappable arms / weapons but the “new paradigm Daleks”
> got such an adverse reaction that they never returned except as
> background props.

They were a terrible idea. What was Moffat thinking?!!!

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

In article <xn0oim7jgevqpfm000@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>The Last Doctor wrote:
>
>> Mickmane <ATH@kruemel.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Daleks always had some with different colours. I don't remember
>> > humpbacks. :)
>>
>> The episode was “Victory of the Daleks” and the new Daleks were
>> larger and had a deeper rear half, and all in casings in bright
>> primary colours. (I thought of them as Power Ranger Daleks at the
>> time. They looked plasticky and designed specifically to become a
>> line of toys.)
>>
>> The idea of the deep rear “hunchback” was that this would be
>> storage for swappable arms / weapons but the “new paradigm Daleks”
>> got such an adverse reaction that they never returned except as
>> background props.
>
>They were a terrible idea. What was Moffat thinking?!!!
>
>If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

I wonder how the Nation estate feels.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <xn0oim7jgevqpfm000@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > The Last Doctor wrote:
> >>
> >> The episode was “Victory of the Daleks” and the new Daleks were
> >> larger and had a deeper rear half, and all in casings in bright
> >> primary colours. (I thought of them as Power Ranger Daleks at
> >> the time. They looked plasticky and designed specifically to
> >> become a line of toys.)
> >>
> >> The idea of the deep rear “hunchback” was that this would be
> >> storage for swappable arms / weapons but the “new paradigm
> >> Daleks” got such an adverse reaction that they never returned
> >> except as background props.
> >
> > They were a terrible idea. What was Moffat thinking?!!!
> >
> > If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
>
> I wonder how the Nation estate feels.

The Terry Nation estate probably just smelt the £££!

In article <xn0oimg6df7irf4000@reader.xsnews.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote:
>
>> In article <xn0oim7jgevqpfm000@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> > The Last Doctor wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The episode was “Victory of the Daleks” and the new Daleks were
>> >> larger and had a deeper rear half, and all in casings in bright
>> >> primary colours. (I thought of them as Power Ranger Daleks at
>> >> the time. They looked plasticky and designed specifically to
>> >> become a line of toys.)
>> >>
>> >> The idea of the deep rear “hunchback” was that this would be
>> >> storage for swappable arms / weapons but the “new paradigm
>> >> Daleks” got such an adverse reaction that they never returned
>> >> except as background props.
>> >
>> > They were a terrible idea. What was Moffat thinking?!!!
>> >
>> > If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
>>
>> I wonder how the Nation estate feels.
>
>The Terry Nation estate probably just smelt the £££!

Yeah.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

Blueshirt wrote on 29/2/24 2:56 am:
> Mickmane wrote:
>> On 28.02.24, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>
>>> With the 11th Doctor it was the likes of Amy and Rory that spoilt
>>> that era for me... plus the multi-coloured humpback Daleks! I did
>>> like Matt's Doctor though.
>>
>> I didn't mind Amy. What did they do that bugged you?
>
> Amy started out fine in "The Eleventh Hour", but she turned out to
> be a selfish spoilt brat who treated Rory like shit as her arc
> developed. For me, Amy & Rory out-stayed their welcome and should
> have moved on a lot sooner. (Rory especially, his dying and coming
> back to life all the time was silly.)
>
> I love Karen Gillan though, she's hot!
>
>> Daleks always had some with different colours. I don't remember
>> humpbacks. :)
>
> Look again! :-)
>
> A re-design made solely to sell toys.
>
A lot of that could also apply to Clara and her boyfriend, whatever his
name was, you know, the one that was talking to Clara on the phone when
he stepped out from the Park onto a road .... and got mowed down!!

Hey, it just struck me .... was this really a Road Safety message
planted by the 'Doctor Who' Producers/Directors/Scriptwriters to get
people to concentrate on what they're doing whilst they are on their
phones?? ;-P
--
Daniel

In article <urphi8$ej5f$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>Blueshirt wrote on 29/2/24 2:56 am:
>> Mickmane wrote:
>>> On 28.02.24, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>
>>>> With the 11th Doctor it was the likes of Amy and Rory that spoilt
>>>> that era for me... plus the multi-coloured humpback Daleks! I did
>>>> like Matt's Doctor though.
>>>
>>> I didn't mind Amy. What did they do that bugged you?
>>
>> Amy started out fine in "The Eleventh Hour", but she turned out to
>> be a selfish spoilt brat who treated Rory like shit as her arc
>> developed. For me, Amy & Rory out-stayed their welcome and should
>> have moved on a lot sooner. (Rory especially, his dying and coming
>> back to life all the time was silly.)
>>
>> I love Karen Gillan though, she's hot!
>>
>>> Daleks always had some with different colours. I don't remember
>>> humpbacks. :)
>>
>> Look again! :-)
>>
>> A re-design made solely to sell toys.
>>
>A lot of that could also apply to Clara and her boyfriend, whatever his
>name was, you know, the one that was talking to Clara on the phone when
>he stepped out from the Park onto a road .... and got mowed down!!
>

DAnny Pink.

>Hey, it just struck me .... was this really a Road Safety message
>planted by the 'Doctor Who' Producers/Directors/Scriptwriters to get
>people to concentrate on what they're doing whilst they are on their
>phones?? ;-P

Yes! Be careful and not be distracted.
>--
>Daniel

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <xn0oimgc8f7raoc002@reader.xsnews.nl>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > The Doctor wrote:
> >> In article <xn0oim72hev7a6v002@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> >> > The Last Doctor wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> The episode was “Victory of the Daleks” and the new Daleks
> >> >> were larger and had a deeper rear half, and all in casings
> >> >> in bright primary colours. (I thought of them as Power
> >> >> Ranger Daleks at the time. They looked plasticky and
> >> >> designed specifically to become a line of toys.)
> >> >>
> >> >> The idea of the deep rear “hunchback” was that this would be
> >> >> storage for swappable arms / weapons but the “new paradigm
> >> >> Daleks” got such an adverse reaction that they never returned
> >> >> except as background props.
> >> >
> >> > They were a terrible idea. What was Moffat thinking?!!!
> >> >
> >> > If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
> >>
> >> Well I wonder how the nation Estate feels.
> >
> > They must have okayed them...
>
> Any documentation to see on that?

I'm sure there is somewhere, in offices. It's not going to be posted
on Usenet though is it?

But as the BBC only own 50% of the rights to the Daleks nothing is
going to happen unless the Hancock's agency agree to their use.
Ergo, they must have agreed to the plastic technicolour humpback
Daleks. As agents, their job is to get the most money they can
for Terry Nation's estate. So obviously, new Dalek design plus new
Dalek toys = £££.

In article <xn0oinkf8g8vwmv007@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote:
>
>> In article <xn0oimgc8f7raoc002@reader.xsnews.nl>,
>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> > The Doctor wrote:
>> >> In article <xn0oim72hev7a6v002@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> >> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> >> > The Last Doctor wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The episode was “Victory of the Daleks” and the new Daleks
>> >> >> were larger and had a deeper rear half, and all in casings
>> >> >> in bright primary colours. (I thought of them as Power
>> >> >> Ranger Daleks at the time. They looked plasticky and
>> >> >> designed specifically to become a line of toys.)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The idea of the deep rear “hunchback” was that this would be
>> >> >> storage for swappable arms / weapons but the “new paradigm
>> >> >> Daleks” got such an adverse reaction that they never returned
>> >> >> except as background props.
>> >> >
>> >> > They were a terrible idea. What was Moffat thinking?!!!
>> >> >
>> >> > If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
>> >>
>> >> Well I wonder how the nation Estate feels.
>> >
>> > They must have okayed them...
>>
>> Any documentation to see on that?
>
>I'm sure there is somewhere, in offices. It's not going to be posted
>on Usenet though is it?
>
>But as the BBC only own 50% of the rights to the Daleks nothing is
>going to happen unless the Hancock's agency agree to their use.
>Ergo, they must have agreed to the plastic technicolour humpback
>Daleks. As agents, their job is to get the most money they can
>for Terry Nation's estate. So obviously, new Dalek design plus new
>Dalek toys = £££.

What about any e-mail proof?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown