Cheers Blue, must give this up now and go chase those bloody heavy Fallow again.
Brexit
- Thread starter finnbear270
- Start date
- Status
Cheers Blue, must give this up now and go chase those bloody heavy Fallow again.
TOMMO.B
Well-Known Member
You are confusing Clan Chief with a Laird. Who the most part was English who were bestowed land by the king. And the clans were disbanded and tartan made illegal by the crown. To brake the spirit of the people only to be brought back by Queen Victoria, after her trips to Scotland.
As for Culloden well that was something totally different again.
Highlandsjohn
Well-Known Member
You are confusing Clan Chief with a Laird. Who the most part was English who were bestowed land by the king. And the clans were disbanded and tartan made illegal by the crown. To brake the spirit of the people only to be brought back by Queen Victoria, after her trips to Scotland.
As for Culloden well that was something totally different again.
Attachments
An interesting map produced by a man with some extremely unusual beliefs. He is convinced that the famine involved the murder of 5 million Irish people by more than half the regiments in the entire British empire army; that this was a genocide planned with the collusion of the Vatican and that the population of Ireland was reduced to only one million - despite the wealth of evidence to the contrary and the total lack of sane corroboration. He also believes that he was framed for a triple sectarian murder in the US by the FBI who had been bribed by MI5 to silence him. A high-profile public trial always being a good way to ensure silence. He further believes that the Irish government is also engaged in a conspiracy to hide the truth and discredit him. His connections to Republican pro-IRA fund raising organisation investigated by the FBI in connection with arms dealing are also worth a mention. I trust you'll forgive those who aren't persuaded by him.
All in all, the above pseudo-historical conspiracy theories do little to bolster the shaky argument that the British government is a less responsible and democratic source of governance than the EU.
All in all, the above pseudo-historical conspiracy theories do little to bolster the shaky argument that the British government is a less responsible and democratic source of governance than the EU.
This has gone so far off into the extremely long grass for me:fester:
Chasey
Well-Known Member
1 million or 5 million? its a holocaust type argument which will rage on. But the facts remain the Brittish did very little to stop the suffering
From the BBC
Before examining this issue of ideology in the 1840s and 1850s, however, we should review what the British government might have done to mitigate the natural catastrophe arising from repeated ravages of potato blight..First, the government might have prohibited the export of grain from Ireland, especially during the winter of 1846-47 and early in the following spring, when there was little food in the country and before large supplies of foreign grain began to arrive. Once there was sufficient food in the country (imported Indian corn or maize), from perhaps the beginning of 1848, the government could have taken steps to ensure that this imported food was distributed to those in greatest need. Second, the government could have continued its so-called soup-kitchen scheme for a much longer time. It was in effect for only about six months, from March to September 1847. As many as three million people were fed daily at the peak of this scheme in July 1847. The scheme was remarkably inexpensive and effective. It should not have been dismantled after only six months and in spite of the enormous harvest deficiency of 1847.
Third, the wages that the government paid on its vast but short-lived public works in the winter of 1846-47 needed to be much higher if those toiling on the public works were going to be able to afford the greatly inflated price of food. Fourth, the poor-law system of providing relief, either within workhouses or outside them, a system that served as virtually the only form of public assistance from the autumn of 1847 onwards, needed to be much less restrictive. All sorts of obstacles were placed in the way, or allowed to stand in the way, of generous relief to those in need of food. This was done in a horribly misguided effort to keep expenses down and to promote greater self-reliance and self-exertion among the Irish poor.
Fifth, the government might have done something to restrain the ruthless mass eviction of families from their homes, as landlords sought to rid their estates of pauperized farmers and labourers. Altogether, perhaps as many as 500,000 people were evicted in the years from 1846 to 1854. The government might also have provided free passages and other assistance in support of emigration to North America - for those whose personal means made this kind of escape impossible.
Last, and above all, the British government should have been willing to treat the famine crisis in Ireland as an imperial responsibility and to bear the costs of relief after the summer of 1847. Instead, in an atmosphere of rising 'famine fatigue' in Britain, Ireland at that point and for the remainder of the famine was thrown back essentially on its own woefully inadequate resources.
From the BBC
Before examining this issue of ideology in the 1840s and 1850s, however, we should review what the British government might have done to mitigate the natural catastrophe arising from repeated ravages of potato blight..First, the government might have prohibited the export of grain from Ireland, especially during the winter of 1846-47 and early in the following spring, when there was little food in the country and before large supplies of foreign grain began to arrive. Once there was sufficient food in the country (imported Indian corn or maize), from perhaps the beginning of 1848, the government could have taken steps to ensure that this imported food was distributed to those in greatest need. Second, the government could have continued its so-called soup-kitchen scheme for a much longer time. It was in effect for only about six months, from March to September 1847. As many as three million people were fed daily at the peak of this scheme in July 1847. The scheme was remarkably inexpensive and effective. It should not have been dismantled after only six months and in spite of the enormous harvest deficiency of 1847.
Third, the wages that the government paid on its vast but short-lived public works in the winter of 1846-47 needed to be much higher if those toiling on the public works were going to be able to afford the greatly inflated price of food. Fourth, the poor-law system of providing relief, either within workhouses or outside them, a system that served as virtually the only form of public assistance from the autumn of 1847 onwards, needed to be much less restrictive. All sorts of obstacles were placed in the way, or allowed to stand in the way, of generous relief to those in need of food. This was done in a horribly misguided effort to keep expenses down and to promote greater self-reliance and self-exertion among the Irish poor.
Fifth, the government might have done something to restrain the ruthless mass eviction of families from their homes, as landlords sought to rid their estates of pauperized farmers and labourers. Altogether, perhaps as many as 500,000 people were evicted in the years from 1846 to 1854. The government might also have provided free passages and other assistance in support of emigration to North America - for those whose personal means made this kind of escape impossible.
Last, and above all, the British government should have been willing to treat the famine crisis in Ireland as an imperial responsibility and to bear the costs of relief after the summer of 1847. Instead, in an atmosphere of rising 'famine fatigue' in Britain, Ireland at that point and for the remainder of the famine was thrown back essentially on its own woefully inadequate resources.
So anybody shot any deer lately ?
Yes! Ran into five bucks this morning, got a pricket and a sore.
EU blather!, How can they request us to "Settle Accounts" in lump sum form with a figure plucked from nowhere, When their own accounts do not even exist?
https://media2.giphy.com/media/ZqlvCTNHpqrio/200.gif#3-grid1
https://media2.giphy.com/media/ZqlvCTNHpqrio/200.gif#3-grid1
Last edited by a moderator:
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
noIts a total Red Herring , no means of enforcement and no one in the UK (apart from Greens, LibDems & SNP) would agree anyway.
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Oh no! The Brexit thread re-appears. I'm off to France on 6 May until 16 May. Ten days respite from May, Corbin and Farron. Bliss!
2130martin
Well-Known Member
Just in time for Macron v Le Pen!!!
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Yes. I watching their head-to-head debate live now on France 24 News on Sky/Freeview.
Bloomin difficult to follow as its being simultaneously translated into spoken English.
So you've got two voices speaking at once. I'd prefer just straight French voices. Easier to follow.
Bloomin difficult to follow as its being simultaneously translated into spoken English.
So you've got two voices speaking at once. I'd prefer just straight French voices. Easier to follow.
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
I'd rather that they all kept their idiotic posturing opinions to themselves, there are only two possible options, broadly those that are mutually beneficial or alternatively mutually destructive. It would be far better all round if both sides were to put their brains into gear before opening their mouths and use some commonsense instead. It is long overdue!
- Status
