HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks)
Subject: Re: QE2/QE II
Followup-To: soc.culture.british
Reply-To: dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks)
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 15:07:51 GMT

In article <92240.120523U48073@uicvm.uic.edu> Cole Kendall <U48073@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>As far as I am aware, the boat that ran aground several weeks ago is
>the QE 2, while the monarch with the problematic daughter-in-law is
>QE II (or ER II).
>
>Is the boat the second boat named after QE (ER I)?

As far as I can see, everyone has been avoiding answering this.

Nope, the Queen Elizabeth was named after the Queen Mum, whose title in the
late 30's was:

	Queen Elizabeth With No Numeral

She launched the ship by tapping it lightly with a bottle of her favourite
gin.

>Or is there a different orthography for numbering boats and monarchs?

Probably.  Although the idea of finding "The Saucy Sal" among our past
monarchs is appealing.
-- 
David Brooks					dbrooks@osf.org
Open Software Foundation			uunet!osf.org!dbrooks
Five more months!  Five more months!
From: Robert.Hartill@cm.cf.ac.uk (virtual user)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: SEND US A POST CARD PLSE !!!!
Date: 4 Sep 92 07:13:19 GMT
Organization: Computing Maths (COMMA), UWCC, Wales, UK

amc@waikato.ac.nz wrote...
-|Hello from New Zealand,
-|
-|We are Summer and Anna, two post-graduate students who are in an office with
-|grotty beige wall paint. We want to cover the walls with postcards from all
-|over the place, so feel free to send us a postcard. We would prefer not to 
-|receive any nude ones and ask you to be tastefull in your selection.
-|
-|The address is : Summer & Anna
-|                 16 Piako Road
-|                 Hamilton
-|                 New Zealand
-|
-|Cheers and we look forward to hearing from you!!!
-|
-|Summer & Anna

I suggest you send a blank postcard (used for competitions etc.)

--
	 I couldn't help it. I can resist everything except temptation.
				 -Oscar Wilde.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:12132 rec.arts.tv.uk:5230 rec.arts.drwho:5780 alt.tv.prisoner:1288
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.tv.uk,rec.arts.drwho,alt.tv.prisoner
Subject: Re: Americanising of the UK, Now: British TV in North America
Date: 3 Sep 92 19:07:39 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: scott@festival.ed.ac.uk (Scott Larnach)
>mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
>
>>consists of these two words). The American exclamation "Gee"
>>derives from a shortening of "Jesus!", again in order to avoid
>>offence by seeming blasphemy.
>
>Similarly, I have heard (though I do not remember where) that "bloody"
>is a corrupt, or euphemistic, form of "by our lady".

Not exactly what I meant, and the above etymology has been doubted
in any case. I was talking about phrases which originated from
a *conscious* effort to avoid blasphemy made midway in uttering
it, not a mere unconscious corruption.

Matthew Huntbach
From: newt@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Michael Steven Newton)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: The Celtic Cross
Date: 3 Sep 92 17:11:43 GMT
Organization: Glasgow University Computing Science Dept.

bross@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Brian J Ross) writes:

>The swastika is a fairly ancient symbol, Sanskrit in origin I believe.  
>At the beginning of this century, it had intellectual connotations -- until
>the Nazis "borrowed" it.  My undergraduate university has a 1920's era

  Actually, the swastika is an IndoEuropean symbol, ie, belonging to the
heritage of the IndoEuropean people as a whole through their common roots
going back many millenia.  Certain of these cultures, esp the Indians and Celts
kept the swastika (and other similar solar symbols) in their artistic
repitoire longer than others.
  The "intellectual connotations" I think you're referring to was the rise
of the study of philology, esp as regards to IndoEuropean "origins", which
was a hot topic in the beginning of this century, and the Germans were
particularly good at it.  It, however, was a subtle subject and some people
had overgeneralized and over simplified interpretations which were a bit
extreme and naive and used for nationalistic reasons... no names need be
mentioned...

  -- mn
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Balmoral and beyond
From: koumis@husc4.harvard.edu (Anthony Koumis)
Date: 25 Aug 92 15:10:42 EDT
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Aug24.201204.26587@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> esh2@po.CWRU.Edu (Evelyn S. Hlabse) writes:
>
>In a previous article, dmaclaug@agsm.ucla.edu (saki) says:
>
>>I know this may bore many of you, but exactly what's happening
>>with Sarah Ferguson? The American press isn't being as forthcoming
>>as they should. I see from one post she's actually left Balmoral.
>>Is there any statement from the government on this? Is the departure
>>of the Duchess of York considered a private matter? Are the Yorks
>>kaput? Does she retain custody of the children or not? Will Andrew
>>be encouraged to find a new Duchess or York, or is that title now
>>defunct?
>>
>>I'm less interested in the sensationalistic aspects of this story
>>than the constitutional/monarchial ramifications, but will be happy
>>to be enlightened in any way.
>>
>
>Yes the Duchess has left Balmoral.  Supposedly she had planned to
>leave before the story about her financial adviser broke.
>
>The Yorks are kaput.  I assume that Fergie's behavior will cause
>some more legal discussions on the issue to custody.
>
>The title is interesting:  if they divorce, Fergie's title will
>be Sarah, Duchess of York.  I don't know what happens about the HRH.
>This is what part of the Windsor problem was.  Mrs. Simpson never was
>an HRH because the government was worried about a divorce and once an
>HRH always an HRH.  If Andrew remarried, his new wife would be The
>Duchess of York.  
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>-- 

I read in the _Boston Globe_ that the Queen if she wanted to could
strip Fergie of her Duchess of York title and the right to be addressed
as Her Royal Highness.

The _Globe_ specualted she might as a way to punish Fergie for her
waywardness.  It also speculated that the custody issue would have to
be re-debated (i.e. deny Fergie custody).  Who knows . . . . . though
if Fergie gets custody, I wouldnt think the Queen would take her titles
away from her, if she wants to have any influence with Fergie and the
kids.
From: wombat@physics.Berkeley.EDU (Gene P. Ledbetter)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Kipling [was Prince Edward]
Date: 25 Aug 1992 23:32:45 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Steinn Sigurdsson's .sig:


>* What do they know of England who only England know  - B.B. 1991 *

That rang a bell.  Part of Kipling's The English Flag goes:

  And what should they know of England
      who only England know?--

Well, Steinn, that's probably the source of your quote.  Damned fine
sentiment, too.

Ledbetter.
From: susher@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Bill and Ben
Date: 25 Aug 92 14:54:20 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <1992Aug25.004615.24471@odin.corp.sgi.com>, mark@tequila.asd.sgi.com writes:
> Can anyone remember the names of the tortoise and the flower in
> the popular childrens TV show "Bill and Ben the flowerpot men"
> 
> -- 
>    Mark Leather mark@sgi.com (415)335-XXXX Silicon Graphics Inc. (ASD) 7U-550

The flower was called Weed, and the tortoise (I think) Slowcoach.

Steve
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: jackson@soldev.tti.com (Dick Jackson)
Subject: QE I (WasWRe: QE2/QE II)
Organization: Transaction Technology Inc.
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 14:58:13 GMT

In article <7130@bigbird.hri.com.hri.com> limey@hri.com writes:
>The original Queen Elizabeth is sitting on it's side rusting in the
>middle of Hong Kong Harbor. There was some nasty fire accident as I
>recall, and they just left it where it toppled over.   Very sad. It
>happened in the 60's some time I think.

A sticky end is also threatening the QE I which has been a tourist
"attraction" in Long Beach harbour since the late '60s. It cost huge
millions (unanticipated) to modify it so as to pass fire codes, etc.
It has been used as a hotel, convention centre and just a "pay your money
and see one of the wonders of the ancient world" type deals (combined with
Howard Hughes giant flying boat).

But it has always lost money and the City of Long Beach has asked for
bids to take it off their hands.  Apparently it again needs millions spent
to refurbish it and my guess is that it will be cut up into little bits
eventually, although I have not seen such a prediction yet in the papers.

The flying boat is being moved to Arizona or Nevada or some other strange
place, by the way.

Dick Jackson
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Water quality - a new money-saver?
Date: 26 Aug 92 08:56:29 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

According to several newspapers, the Government is now about to
drastically weaken the Government agency which has been responsible for
monitoring water quality and industrial discharges.  Under the new
scheme, companies will be responsible for monitoring their own
discharges, and will be expected to report themselves as in violation
if they breach their maximum-allowed-pollutant limits.  Good one, yeah?

Seems to me like this could be a useful first foot in the door.  Maybe
we could get them to extend this style of law-enforcement.  (Pollution
limits ARE generally the subject of law, after all.)  How about
eliminating traffic wardens and motorway patrols, for example?
'Motorists will be expected to turn themselves in if they park
illegally or drive over the speed limits.'

More conveniently, we could get rid of Customs and Immigration, which
provide tediously boring ends to holidays.  'Persons entering the
country will be expected to arrest themselves if they are entering
illegally, importing illegal goods, or in excess of their duty-free
limits.'  I could go on, but it's like shooting fish in a barrel.  I'm
sure you can think of similar ideas which would make your own life
easier.

-- 
Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK
 P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272 303132
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:12098 rec.arts.tv.uk:5201 rec.arts.drwho:5738 alt.tv.prisoner:1271
From: spk@uk.ac.aber (Stephen Kingston)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.tv.uk,rec.arts.drwho,alt.tv.prisoner
Subject: Re: Americanising of the UK, Now: British TV in North America
Date: 31 Aug 92 11:34:03 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept., University of Wales at Aberystwyth.

baylor@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com wrote:
> Hey, I'm a moderately well educated American, and I don't know 
> what the smeg "SMEG" means. (Seems to be used as a synonym to
> "figurative excrement".) I bet it would pass the censors.

Look up "Smegma" in a dictionary.

Stephen.
-- 
Gweleis i rac neb nym gweles pop annwyl. ef diwyl yneges. Gweleis i pasc.
(I saw the one above all men,  he saw me;  he, the beloved of his people,
who fulfills his mission. I saw Easter.) "Yspeil Taliesin" ---Taliesin---
spk@uk.ac.aber --- spk%uk.ac.aber@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk --- Stephen Kingston
From: limey@hri.com (Craig Hughes)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: QE2/QE II
Date: 27 Aug 92 19:01:44 GMT
Reply-To: limey@hri.com
Organization: Horizon Research, Inc.

In article <92240.120523U48073@uicvm.uic.edu>, U48073@uicvm.uic.edu (Cole Kendall) writes:
|> As far as I am aware, the boat that ran aground several weeks ago is
|> the QE 2, while the monarch with the problematic daughter-in-law is
|> QE II (or ER II).
|> 
|> Is the boat the second boat named after QE (ER I)?
|> Or is there a different orthography for numbering boats and monarchs?


The original Queen Elizabeth is sitting on it's side rusting in the
middle of Hong Kong Harbor. There was some nasty fire accident as I
recall, and they just left it where it toppled over.   Very sad. It
happened in the 60's some time I think.

--craig
-- 
================================================================================
| Horizon Research, Inc.		E-MAIL:   limey@hri.com
| 1432 Main Street			PHONE:	  (617) 466-8300
| Waltham, MA 02154			FAX:	  (617) 466-8323
================================================================================
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:11875 soc.culture.usa:6868
From: steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Prince Edward - is he a well-known homosexual?
Date: 25 Aug 92 16:35:10
Organization: Lick Observatory/UCO
NNTP-Posting-Host: topaz.ucsc.edu
In-reply-to: w.p.coyne@newcastle.ac.uk's message of 21 Aug 92 12:08:27 GMT

In article <BtC1q3.8uE@newcastle.ac.uk> w.p.coyne@newcastle.ac.uk writes:


     Is it true that some American newspapers have reported widely accepted 
   stories about Prince Edward being homosexual?  It would seem unlikely
   that the UK papers would voluntarily refrain from publishing such a 
   story.

I have no idea as to any royal's sexual preferences, but the Grauniad
recently referred to Prince Ed as "apparently not the marrying type"
while discussing the media frenzy over his brothers' marriage
problems...

*  Steinn Sigurdsson   			 Lick Observatory     	  *
* steinly@helios.ucsc.edu		"standard disclaimer"  	  *
* Oh look out my country's patriots are hunting down below	  *
* What do they know of England who only England know  - B.B. 1991 *
From: smckinty@sunicnc.France.Sun.COM (Steve McKinty - Sun ICNC)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: U.S./British school grades, was Re: Why I read the Economist
Date: 4 Sep 1992 11:42:55 GMT
Organization: SunConnect
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: hardy.france.sun.com

In article <1992Sep04.095845.21823@bas-a.bcc.ac.uk>, ucacijw@ucl.ac.uk (Mr Ian John Wakeman) writes:

	> 12 to 16 in some parts of the country.  There are also comprehensive
	> schools and grammar schools (in areas where grammar schools still
	> exist, are the non-grammar schools called secondary moderns?)

Over the past few years the non-Grammar schools in those areas seem to
have adopted the name 'High School', to avoid the negative connotations
of 'secondary'.

Steve
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Balmoral and beyond
Date: 30 Aug 92 00:04:23 GMT
Reply-To: hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: DESY ZEUS Central Data Acquisition

In article <1992Aug26.174618.14554@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>,
esh2@po.CWRU.Edu (Evelyn S. Hlabse) writes:

|>In a previous article, nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) says:
|>
|>>In article <1992Aug25.151044.15097@husc3.harvard.edu>
|>koumis@husc4.harvard.edu (Anthony Koumis) writes:
|>>
|>>   I read in the _Boston Globe_ that the Queen if she wanted to
|>could
|>>   strip Fergie of her Duchess of York title and the right to be
|>addressed
|>>   as Her Royal Highness.
|>>
|>>Do American's need to be told this? Surely it's obvious. The Queen
|>>(being the Queen) can do anything she chooses.
|>>
|>>Nick
|>>
|>	Sorry, Nick.  You're wrong.  The Queen must have
|>	permission of Parliament to do many things although
|>	I do not know if it includes taking the title from
|>	Fergie.  She can take the HRH away since she is the
|>	one to bestow it.

The title would require an act of parliament to quash it. Cf Lord Cagan
who kept the peerage but lost his knighthood. This is all because of the
Magna Carta (They are going to get Clint Eastwood for the remake called
Magnum Carta "So the question you gotta ask yourself is...").

Phill
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.tv.uk,rec.arts.drwho,alt.tv.prisoner
From: husted@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Jack)
Subject: Re: Americanising of the UK, Now: British TV in North America
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Distribution:  world
Date:  2 SEP 92 16:28:21    

In article <BCR.92Sep2143519@hpl3sn02.cern.ch>, bcr@cernapo.cern.ch (Bill Riemers) writes...

>In article <1992Sep2.061058.21842@osf.org> sp@osf.org (Simon Patience) writes:
>>  Well... it's an abbreviation for smegma.
> 
>Thanks for that enlightenment.  Now, what in the hell does "smegma" mean?
> 
>                                   Bill

Actually, this is not an unintelligent question asked by
someone too lazy to look it up in his own dictionary.  'Smegma'
can be found in some dictionaries (e.g. Random House Collegiate)
and not in others (e.g. Webster's Collegiate).
As I recall (I don't have it with me now), it's something like
paraphrase now: oily, viscious (sp?) liquid produced between
the foreskin and the penis in the male and the analogous
anatomical position in the female.

Now, would someone PLEASE enlighten me as to the origin of the
phrase GORDON BENNETT used most often by Ace?  I assume he
must have been infamous to have his name become an epithet.
An American example is 'Your name is Mudd.'  I would
appreciate the particulars on GB.

Thanks,
Jack
From: jim@cs.strath.ac.uk (Jim Reid)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: U.S./British school grades
Date: 4 Sep 92 12:14:41 GMT
	<1992Sep3.174615.2919@nas.nasa.gov>
	<1992Sep3.191453.15053@cco.caltech.edu>
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Strathclyde Univ., Glasgow, Scotland.
In-reply-to: miriam@seismo.gps.caltech.edu's message of 3 Sep 92 19:14:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.191453.15053@cco.caltech.edu> miriam@seismo.gps.caltech.edu (Miriam Jackson) writes:

	   British

	   nursery
	   infants         (4 1/2 to 7)
	   juniors         (7 to 11, called 1st to 4th years)
	   seniors         (11 to 16, called 1st to 5th years)
	   sixth form      (16 to 18, divided into upper and lower sixth)

This may well describe the education system in England and Wales, but
it most certainly does not apply in Scotland. The model there is:

	4/5-11 years: primary school
	11-18 years:  secondary school

Some fee-paying schools in Scotland follow the English model, though
this is closer to the system used in English fee-paying schools than
that used by state schools.

		Jim
Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british
From: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn)
Subject: Re: UK Phone directories on-line
Organization: Digital Equipment Co. Ltd., Reading, England
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:33:28 GMT


In article <714721045snx@nwavbbs.demon.co.uk>, pd@nwavbbs.demon.co.uk (Peter Duffield) writes...
> 
>In article <1992Aug24.101357.14679@bnr.co.uk> agm@bnr.co.uk writes:
> 
>>
>>In article <BtE2t9.FzL@ibmpcug.co.uk>, derek@ibmpcug.co.uk (Derek Jones)
>>writes:
>>|> Is there internet / Compu$ access to the UK BT phone directory anywhere?
>>
>>I don't think so, but BT has an incredibly impressive modem dialup
>>service called PhoneBase. It costs nothing to subscribe, you just pay
>>for the calls.
>>

There's also Electronic Yellow Pages, and that costs _nothing_.
Not even a dial up fee. Details on every business in the UK at
your fingertips. I use it quite a lot, it's cheaper than
directory enquiries!

>>Ask you BT sales office!
ditto

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Craig Cockburn, Digital Equipment Co. Ltd, Reading, England.     Suas
  Internet: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com                           leis
  UUCP:..!decwrl!edieng.enet.dec.com!cockburn                      a'
                                                                   Gha\idhlig!
  Views here are my own, and are not necessarily those of Digital
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Saturday, 29 Aug 1992 16:22:42 EDT
From: <IO20402@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Chortle and the Wheelies

Remember that oh so lovable yet goofy dragon, Chortle. And the good natured and
friendly town full of Wheelies. And the Welsh witch?
Coming stateside, I missed all the reruns of the show that started airing on
BBC1 around January. *tears falling down cheek*
Tell me why they never came out with a stuffed Chortle toy for kids?
I would have loved that so much more than those demented Sindys or so
unreal Barbies. And, I stick to the conclusion that teddy bears are sinister.
Maybe I just miss home. Oh, what with those wonderful Auzzie soaps like
Neighbors and Sons and Daughters. (TV ain't much better here.)
But Chortle and the Wheelies was good old fun, I'd curl my toes while watching
it...at eighteen.
(Sigh) What I would give for an entire taped collection of Chortle...

                Tak Car loves,
                             Kerry a.k.a "The Lost"
From: cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Chris Cooke)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Queen - Worse than Robert Maxwell ????
Date: 3 Sep 92 11:44:58 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
In-reply-to: zzassgl@uts.mcc.ac.uk's message of 2 Sep 92 07:20:54 GMT

In article <5742@mccuts.uts.mcc.ac.uk> zzassgl@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Geoff Lane) writes:

   It would have been a bit more enlightening to indicate the ownership of each
   item as well as the running costs.  For instance, she doesn't personally own
   all the palaces.  These would continue to be maintained by the goverment
   whether of not the monarchy existed.  

She personally owns, I think, Sandringham and Balmoral.









   -- 
   Geoff. Lane.                                  Janet: zzassgl@uk.ac.mcc.uts
   UTS Sys Admin, Manchester Computing Centre, Oxford Rd, Manchester, M13 9PL
--
	-- Chris. 	cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk   (on Janet, cc@uk.ac.ed.dcs)

		
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: U.S./British school grades, was Re: Why I read the Economist
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 15:02:30 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.134405.16334@pixel.kodak.com>, dj@ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones) writes:
> In article <PLUMMER.92Sep3203528@nutmeg.cs.swarthmore.edu> plummer@cs.swarthmore.edu (David Barker-Plummer) writes:
> >Which reminds me of a question that I have been meaning to ask for
> >yonks.  What percentage of Britons go on to university, or tertiary
> >eduction generally?  What is the analogous figure for the US?
> >
> Something like 15% of Brits go to University (meaning the old kind of
> University).  Add in Polytechnics (old name) and other "further
> education" institutions granting qualifications lower than a degree, and
> I'd guess about 30% get some kind of education beyond age 18.  Just a
> guess, mind.

Are you sure about this? The last figure I read (in the Economist) a few
months back said that the number of people going to university had just 
risen from 5 to 7%.

Simon.
-- 
  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:12116 rec.arts.tv.uk:5221 rec.arts.drwho:5765 alt.tv.prisoner:1281
From: cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Chris Cooke)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.tv.uk,rec.arts.drwho,alt.tv.prisoner
Subject: Re: Americanising of the UK, Now: British TV in North America
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:51:11 GMT
	<1992Sep3.114224.7610@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
In-reply-to: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk's message of 3 Sep 92 11:42:24 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.114224.7610@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:

   This usage obviously originated at a time when it was felt
   offensive to use "God!" as an exclamation, so people finding
   themselves using it quickly lengthened it to "Gordon-Bennet".
   Perhaps this is not obvious in the USA because there, the first
   syllable of Gordon-Bennet is not pronounced exactly as the word
   God.

It's not obvious in Scotland either; people say "Gordon Bennet" but the first
syllable never sounds remotely like "God".  Hmm, interesting...
--
	-- Chris. 	cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk   (on Janet, cc@uk.ac.ed.dcs)