"TG'sFM" <suvvdj@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:c45a2987-2818-4519-a3dc-a4407d0a95e7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Apr 30, 11:14 am, "George W. Frost" <fro...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "TG'sFM" <suv...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>>
news:b330e9f3-6444-49ce-9f21-3639fd6a3cb7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 30, 9:35 am, ray <ferre...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> TG'sFM wrote:
>> >> > On Apr 30, 9:17 am, David Springthorpe
>> >> > <GordonLightfoot...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=454750
>>
>> >> > I know what's wrong with it. The last line says it was a 'white
>> >> > brick
>> >> > home'. How can you have white bricks? The process of firing them
>> >> > in
>> >> > the kiln would darken them.
>>
>> >> Calcil bricks popular in the 1970s were white. That is, if you're
into
>> >> bricks. Besser also produced similar textured bricks in various
>> >> shapes,
>> >> types and colours. Apart, of course, from just painting the
bludgers.
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Ray
>>
>> > If the house was painted, they should have said the 'white painted
>> > home'.
>>
>> But they didn't, they said a white brick home
>>
>> There are thousands of homes around with white bricks and not painted
>> actually, they were a very light shade of grey
>
> Since when is a very light shade of grey, 'white'? I expect honest
> and accuracy in journalism. If the house has light grey bricks, I
> expect the journalist to say that the house has light grey bricks, not
> say it is a white brick house.
The bricks were called white and they looked white, but when you looked
closer, it appeared not to be a brilliant white, but a dirty white, or a
very light grey.
They were also not as smooth as an ordinary kiln fired red brick, but had
a
sandy finish, almost like smoothed over coarse sandpaper
|
