RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

slvemike4u -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 6:25:26 PM)

This is in response to your two preceding posts......Get fucking help ....please.



I was afraid of that....This post was in response to RealOne...not FullCircle,despite Collarme's silliness



Real0ne -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 6:26:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09

Don't the courts have to "interpret" law in England? Or is every law so un-ambiguously written that it's completely clear what it means, and whether it applies to a particular case? Frankly, that's hard to believe. i don't understand the confusion expressed in the other thread about the fact that the U.S. Constitution has to be "interpreted". How can *any* law not have to be interpreted?

pam


its not as bad as here.

the constitutional courts have all but been abolished here.

they are replaced with administrative courts which is judge dredd style justice, technically nonjudical but they are labeled judicial and people do not know the difference because there are fine distinctions that need to be drawn in law to know and its pretty hard to feed the babies and study law at the same time.

you get to sniff a real court at the appellate level and the supreme court which can hold those tribunals are out of reach until you get past the gate keepers of the sludge and retirement funds.

The problem that you are facing is that the us can use law all the way back to 1215 from the magna charta and the words used mean precisely the opposite as they do here so now what?

AND>>>>>

they aggregate the words, for example "land" in my state in the MOB statutory rules means "land tenements and hereditaments" and guess what that just did?

you no longer have pure title to land which is required for it to be untaxable by the MOB that is ruling.

Enforcement is in the republic which you have no access too in the MOB administrative courts.

this is taking place through out the whole world in law to abolish any means of obtain INDIVIDUAL freedom.

Your freedom is in MOBDOM.  That is why this planet is overun by corporations.



Real0ne -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 6:37:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Okay,I am willing to eat a small serving of crow....though I still dispute Paine's inclusion as well as a number of the giants offerd by FDD
Here is wiki's definition of the Founding Fathers and who that encompasses;

The Founding Fathers of the United States of America were political leaders a

Notice the two key subsets....Signers of the Declaration....and the part I neglected Framers of the Constitution....which,of course would include Madison and Hamilton.So there is my small serving of crow.....but FDD went too far in trying to include figures such as Ethan Allen,Henry Knox,John Hanson ,George Clinton and Paine.They appear in no accepted definition of the "Founding Fathers".Giants all.....but not Fathers





since when has wiki become even a reasonable resource?

I can go in and change that to read anything I want.



Fellow -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 6:43:48 PM)

One needs to define what "understanding British history" means? Knowing basic facts may not mean understanding. Also, who is Amer(t)ica? Hard to generalize this way. There are so many Americas. I was grown up in Europe close to GP. Regardless of factual knowledge, I certainly understand British history better than most people far away.



Real0ne -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 6:50:08 PM)

well its not much different than here.

freedom is removing the shackles from your ankles and swearing to become a slave to to the king as a "subject".

freedom in america is removing the shackles from your ankles and swearing to become a slave to to the united states as a "citizen" subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

if you are a citizen you are not self governed but mob (democracy) governed.

At least in briton they have a real live body as a monarch and all we have is the "color" or a fictional monarch called the "state", a nonliving all powerful entity.

citizen and subject are synonymous in law

there is no head to chop off here and you have a head that you all can chop off.



Tantriqu -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 7:29:40 PM)

Look at the blankyank faces when you mention Cromwell and Civil War in the same sentence.
And east-coast yanks selling fuel to German U-boats which killed thousands in the Atlantic.
And Alex Trebek giving the stank-eye to Jeopardists who think WWII started with Pearl Harbour.
Thomas Jefferson had an English accent
And oh, yeah, we burnt the white house down:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ety2FEHQgwM&feature=related




Real0ne -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 8:08:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

This is in response to your two preceding posts......Get fucking help ....please.



I was afraid of that....This post was in response to RealOne...not FullCircle,despite Collarme's silliness




no matter how delusional you are nothing will change the FACT that gw never signed the declaration of independence and he was not the first president, hanson was, and the colonies were corporations under the king.

this is really basic stuff man why even post here if you dont know history?



TheHeretic -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 8:25:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

what do the largest contingent of this website understand about British history ?



That depends. How historically accurate was Blackadder? [;)]

How about this; Ya'll are subjects of the Crown, who have, over a very long and interesting history (laced with fun mythology), forced the Crown to grant rights and freedoms. You have fought wars with damn near everybody, over damn near anything. You were great early leaders in industry, and technical innovations. You used to be a big power player, but I saw a report online that you are now selling your only aircraft carrier, so I guess that has wrapped up. You also had this really weird long thing with the Church, that we decided to skip.

That'll do for 100 words or less, methinks.



Arpig -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 9:33:14 PM)

quote:

he was not the first president, hanson was,
Not quite. Hanson was in fact the 9th "President of the Continental Congress" (or more correctly President of the United States in Congress Assembled) under the Articles of Confederation. Peyton Randolph was the first.
George Washington was the first "President of the United States" under the Consitution which superceded the Articles. So Washing ton both was, and wasn't, the first President...it just depends on how you are defining President.

As to the OP, well I'm not American, but I know a shitload about British history.



Hippiekinkster -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 9:40:24 PM)

Beatles.



susan34B -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 11:08:56 PM)

From the British perspective,your "Founding Fathers" were an 18th century version of Al-Qieda....just a bunch of terrorists.
There goes any chance I ever had of getting a visa!!

Yes,our laws and decisions on interpretation of the law are based on case-law and it's review by the appellant courts.Judging from posts on here we are lucky not to have a written constitution.
In the matter of the ruling on segregation in schools,as we never practiced segregation,the question never arose,although there is law regarding racial discrimination and human rights. 

(Ducks and runs)



Edwynn -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 11:17:55 PM)




two Celts talking, looking at just completed Stonehenge ...

"helluva cemetery monument, innit?";  "truly!";  "we got the extra package, where you can tell when the equinoxes are gonna happen";   "smart move that was";  "yup, and good thing those aliens came just in time and moved those big ones into place, my back was hurting just thinking about having to haul those things";  "indeed, but one of them asked me a weird question before they left, he said 'you know anything about British history?' ";  "who?"   "that's what I said" .



---  "Anglos and Saxons and Vikes! Oh my!" ---


"Entshuldigung, wissen Sie sich die Geschichte der Kornwallen?";  "The history of ? ... I think you mean the ... ";  "nein! nein! Bitte, lasen Sie mir die Spekulation anstellen.";  "OK, next guess then.";  "hmm ... die Gesichte der Schotten?";  "Sorta, I mean not really, but ... ";  "Siehe! Ich weiß schon! 'Die Geschichte der Briten!' Ja?";  "Bingo! ... um, does this mean we all have to talk like you guys now?";  "Ja, von jetzt vielleicht rund 500 Jahre an.";  "Well, OK then.  oops! I mean 'Na, das stimmt!' "


Then there was a good spell where they had a heck of a time finding out just who was king until some guy named Edward finally Confessed to it.

Once upon a sunny day Billy the Bastard came over from Normandy and, speaking the most awful French, said "Sorry Harold, auntie Emma invited me!"  Thence the mongrelization of soldier German and soldier French that after a few centuries conduced to Chaucer-speak, later to be taken up by William the Shakespearier and set upon a course of usable discourse and exemplary literature.

And around that same Playwrite-ian Period was Elizabeth I (Engl.) talking to James VI (Sctl.) and thusly said to him "Dear cousin, I was thinking of passing the torch your way, but I wanted to make sure first that you don't hold a grudge, just because I chopped your mum's head off or anything.";  "Ha! think nuffin' of it cousin, I know you didn't quite mean to, and she just bent down to pick up her dropped brooch at the wrong time, you know?";  "ha ha! Well I was hoping you'd understand, I mean, my daddy chopped me mum's head off too, you know, and I was just ... ";  "Ha, no worries, I mean, I think that's just part of the deal now, right?";  "Sure enough! Maybe we should just amend that to the laws of succession and say that ...  ";   "what laws? ha ha!";  "hush! I'm making funny here, ... 'must be properly next in line, and have had mummy's head chopped off to be eligible for the throne', whadya think?";  "ha ha ha!";  "ha ha ha!";  "ha ha ha ha ... " ;   "OK, then what ya gonna do about 'keeping the faith' for the people, Jimmy?";  "Oh, don't you worry cousin Liz, I'm gonna write the Bible on Bible-writing! It's gonna have my name all over it, bet on that one.";  "I knew I could count on you, cousin."

Then William and Mary went on a cruise from Holland and decided to stop by for a visit to Mary's papa, whereupon she gave him a bunch of oranges and said "I hear it's nice in France this time of year, daddy, have a nice retirement!"; "But ... ";  " Oh c'mon daddy you know how us Stuarts are! Happy sailing!"


The English invite Georg Ludwig to be George I and sit in the big chair, and first thing he says is "Entschuldigung, können Sie mir helfen? Wissen Sie sich die Geschichte des Britanniens?" 

England:  "Oh sh#t! not this again ... "


George III: "What's all this, 'no reprehensions without taxation,' or, no wait,  'no plantations without ... ' ok,  whatever it is, who do you think you are? Yer just another Ireland but with funny looking people on it. Pay up!"



Lots of deal making and breaking with their friends yesterday/enemies today and enemies yesterday/friends today all over Europe, skillfully playing that "balance of power/imbalance of mind" game so skilfully all the while, but a good highlight being when Wellington Waterloo'ed the French Empire and picked the army of Napoleon's bones apart.


Aside from Victoria getting her knickers in a knot over public acknowledgment of knickers,  business as usual until some German generals forgot to take those helmets off and wore them literally for a few decades and weren't aware of the brain vasoconstriction it caused thereby and decided to wage a 19th century war in the no-longer-19th century. As payback some French Clemenceau-and-ceau made the Germans pay five gazillion francs per annum for the next five gazillion years and the resultant 'Why Mir?" Republik had a tough go of it, and desperate people elected somebody who wrote a book that set an all time record for repetitiveness of drivel and wore a customized mustache, whence round two.


Then The Beatles sang "I wanna Sturm und Draaaannng!"; ha ha, just kidding, it was called "I Want to Hold Your Hand" actually (that George I thing stuck in my head there), whereupon a new generation of Americans discovered that British people talked different, and made funny jokes real fast. 



But the only thing I actually know much about is the Blackburn plant of the Mullard Ltd. (though actually Phillips owned) company that made what some think are the smooovest sounding EL34 valves ever made. And a little about Leak amplifiers, and the famous Quad electrostatic speakers.


And other than that, just that they pour milk into their tea, but only at a certain time of the day.













BitaTruble -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (3/31/2011 11:53:43 PM)

My obsession with British history is limited to the time between the Battle of Hastings through and including the end of the Tudor reign. Within that time frame, I probably know more than the average American.

I am fairly well versed in American history and the by-products of that as it relates to British history where the two intersect but my interest in British history is mostly peripheral aside from the time frame I mentioned.



pahunkboy -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (4/1/2011 12:34:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: susan34B

From the British perspective,your "Founding Fathers" were an 18th century version of Al-Qieda....just a bunch of terrorists.
There goes any chance I ever had of getting a visa!!

Yes,our laws and decisions on interpretation of the law are based on case-law and it's review by the appellant courts.Judging from posts on here we are lucky not to have a written constitution.
In the matter of the ruling on segregation in schools,as we never practiced segregation,the question never arose,although there is law regarding racial discrimination and human rights. 

(Ducks and runs)


The issue was and IS a central bank.

The theme recurs today.



Edwynn -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (4/1/2011 12:35:03 AM)




quote:

ORIGINAL: susan34B

In the matter of the ruling on segregation in schools,as we never practiced segregation,the question never arose,




The question never arose? Well I wonder why that is? How does one racially segregate a racially homogeneous group? In a darn near racially homogeneous country?

That famous British humor! ha ha !

Stopit! yer killing me here!  ha ha ha ha ....






Hippiekinkster -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (4/1/2011 12:43:43 AM)

Edwynn, that was hilarious! "Yeah, from now for maybe 500 years!" Hehehe

Quad made possibly the finest midrange speaker ever. Low end sucked; I heard them paired with subwoofers, AUdio Research electronics, and a SOTA Star Sapphire turntable. Don't remember the tonearm or cartridge. Sweet. Reference Recordings "Tafelmusik" 45RPM 12"LP. http://www.referencerecordings.com/about.asp If you are a real music lover...

Mullard made some killer tubes. But, sorry, I'm running Amperex 6922 (6DJ8) gold pin Orange Globe logo tubes for my RIAA preamp section, and Amperex Bugle Boy 6dj8s in my line level stage in my Counterpoint SA5.1

I have an autographed copy of "Elizabeth" by David Starkey. And "Elizabeth" (the film) with Cate Blanchett is one of the best films ever made, IMO. Liz war ganz toll.



Edwynn -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (4/1/2011 1:53:30 AM)





Thanks.

I intended to keep to the theme of the OP by interspersing the question 'do you know British history?' throughout the story, so that was the task of the aliens and the 5th century invaders and George III. I accidentally closed the browser afterward so I can't edit, but the "lasen Sie mir die Spekulation ... ("let me guess ... ") has a misspelling; "lasen" should be "lassen."  History of the Cornwalls indeed.

For those who may not know, James VI-Scotland/I-England's mother was Mary Queen of Scots, and even though Elizabeth I had her under house arrest for a long time it is believed that she did not wish to see her actually executed, as best we know.


But back to the tube/valve electronics - yeah, it seems most people like the Amperex tubes more than others for the 6DJ8/6922 types (but being that they were made in Brooklyn, NY, I bet you just like them 'cause your being a homer, ha), but the EL34 valves from the Mullard Blackburn factory are favored by a lot of people that use those as power tubes. But I'm sure you've read all the BB discussion about all that, and it really depends on what circuit tubes are used in and so there can be no definitive 'best' tube of a given type. The NOS tubes of whatever variety that are most highly regarded are getting crazy sums of money now, but that's ok, there being still lots of very good ones to choose from at sane prices.



For British who might wish to look at a small but very important part of their recent history, here's a plant tour of the Blackburn facility:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Mullard+-+Blackburn+Vacuum+Tubes+Factory+%28Part+1%29+&aq=f








Aneirin -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (4/1/2011 2:54:10 AM)

I suspect many Americans know about as much about British history as they do about American history, and that goes for the Brits too, as history was back at high school unless they have an interest in history and have set out to seek more knowledge on the subject.

That being our combined understanding of history is rather sketchy and of course history is written by winners and it is a potent political tool, for it can inspire modern minds with the reported sentiments of the past.




Politesub53 -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (4/1/2011 2:58:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09

Can i ask the questions i did on the other thread?

Is there a high court in the U.K. that reviews the legality of laws?

If there's no written constitution, how do you determine if laws are legal? Or are they all legal, by definition, once they're passed? Is there any way to get rid of an immoral law if it has the support of Parliament? How would Brown vs the Board of Education of Topeka have been handled in the U.K.? (1954 U.S. Supreme Court hearing that overturned legally mandated segregation in the U.S.)

Don't the courts have to "interpret" law in England? Or is every law so un-ambiguously written that it's completely clear what it means, and whether it applies to a particular case? Frankly, that's hard to believe. i don't understand the confusion expressed in the other thread about the fact that the U.S. Constitution has to be "interpreted". How can *any* law not have to be interpreted?

Are there any laws currently in effect in the U.K. that are over 200 years old, and how were they phrased? Does the interpretation of these laws (if they exist) change over time, or are they always understood to mean exactly the same thing?

pam


New laws are passed by Parliament. They alone have the power as they are the elected body ( By the people for the people if you like ) The UK Courts use precedent to decide how an individual law is interpreted. The Supreme Court here is the highest court of the land. As far as I know it has the power to refer a law back to Parliament but not to alter it. The reason for this is that it is an unelected body acting for the people. Any law refered back to Parliament is normally not used until the conflict between old and existing law is passed ( again as far as I know )

Basically both the Supreme Court and the House of Lords act as a check on Parliament but dont have the power to over rule. ( again due to Parliament being elected )

As for old laws, some sections of the Magna Carta are still on the law books. Others have been reworded and updated over time. Kind of like an ongoing process. The following link on Parliamentary Sovereignty helps explain things.
http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/sovereignty/




Moonhead -> RE: Brtitish History as Ametica understands it ? (4/1/2011 4:27:07 AM)

The yanks have at least heard of John Wilkes, which is more than a lot of Brits have: he's regarded as an important historical figure over there due to his support for home rule for the colonies and driving George III barking mad.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125