What Do I Do If I Get This Job?
Jobs & Education1 min ago
To the Tower with them.
63 Answers
http://www.dailymail....e-Morrissey-date.html
Well what can be said about these traitors?
They and those who support them are in the minority, judging by the Multi Ethnic crowds who came onto the streets of Leicester in their thousands to cheer and wave their flags in support of the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Duchess of Cambridge.
So I say to self-haters such as:
Morrissey,and The Smiths.
Roger Waters of Pink Floyd
Jeremy Paxman
and all those others, such as:
Sean Penn
Argentina’s President Cristina Kirchner
Portia Simpson Miller, the newly re-elected prime minister of Jamaica
'Rule Britannia'
Well what can be said about these traitors?
They and those who support them are in the minority, judging by the Multi Ethnic crowds who came onto the streets of Leicester in their thousands to cheer and wave their flags in support of the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Duchess of Cambridge.
So I say to self-haters such as:
Morrissey,and The Smiths.
Roger Waters of Pink Floyd
Jeremy Paxman
and all those others, such as:
Sean Penn
Argentina’s President Cristina Kirchner
Portia Simpson Miller, the newly re-elected prime minister of Jamaica
'Rule Britannia'
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I agree that Morrissey's opinions are rather confusing and (frankly) invalid, and he - like Penn - is wrong to characterise British assertiveness over the Falklands as 'imperialism'. Our presence in the Falklands may be part of the empire's legacy, but defending the wish of the inhabitants to remain British is anything but imperialism. In fact the idea of a country making demands for a territory which do not wish to enter its sovereignty seems like a much better example of imperialism to me.
But what I will say is that I'm slightly uncomfortable with tarring anyone who is remotely critical of Britain 'traitors'. Your use of the word is emotive and inaccurate - you could hardly call Cristina Kirchner a 'self-hater' in this context because she is not British. I'm very unhappy with the idea that an even slightly critical view of the history of the British Empire, for instance, is somehow 'anti-British'. If the idea of intellectual self-criticism is treacherous, then call me a traitor, and a proud one.
But what I will say is that I'm slightly uncomfortable with tarring anyone who is remotely critical of Britain 'traitors'. Your use of the word is emotive and inaccurate - you could hardly call Cristina Kirchner a 'self-hater' in this context because she is not British. I'm very unhappy with the idea that an even slightly critical view of the history of the British Empire, for instance, is somehow 'anti-British'. If the idea of intellectual self-criticism is treacherous, then call me a traitor, and a proud one.
Sorry - why is Paxman being lumped in with the others?
I mean I know the Mule doesn't miss a chance to try to have a go at outhe BBC - Sounds like his crime has been to go to ex colonial countries and ask them what they thought of their shared history with Britain.
This was hillarious though
//The Monarchy provides an essential warmth which is missing in the relations between, say, France and its former colonies. //
Yes of course - like the deep warmth felt for Britain by say Ireland or the deep wamth of the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya against British rule.
We killed nearly 5,000 natives there for trying to kick us out - then we left.
Who would have done such a thing - Surely not Winston Churchill? surely not with out nobel queen on the throne?
Trying to link the genuine rights of the Falkland Islanders with the British Empire is a bunch of horse manure
And if you fall for it then - Patriotism is not only the last resort of the scoundrel but the first resort of the stupid!
I mean I know the Mule doesn't miss a chance to try to have a go at outhe BBC - Sounds like his crime has been to go to ex colonial countries and ask them what they thought of their shared history with Britain.
This was hillarious though
//The Monarchy provides an essential warmth which is missing in the relations between, say, France and its former colonies. //
Yes of course - like the deep warmth felt for Britain by say Ireland or the deep wamth of the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya against British rule.
We killed nearly 5,000 natives there for trying to kick us out - then we left.
Who would have done such a thing - Surely not Winston Churchill? surely not with out nobel queen on the throne?
Trying to link the genuine rights of the Falkland Islanders with the British Empire is a bunch of horse manure
And if you fall for it then - Patriotism is not only the last resort of the scoundrel but the first resort of the stupid!
// the genuine rights of the Falkland Islanders.... //
apparently the right to self determination applies only to aboriginal populations. in which case that wouldn't apply to the present Falkland Islanders, since their ancestry dates only to 1833.
if the British claim relies heavily on self-determination of the islanders, which doesn't apparently apply, seems there's not much basis for a claim - is there?
apparently the right to self determination applies only to aboriginal populations. in which case that wouldn't apply to the present Falkland Islanders, since their ancestry dates only to 1833.
if the British claim relies heavily on self-determination of the islanders, which doesn't apparently apply, seems there's not much basis for a claim - is there?
indeed - so the validity of claims of the various parties relies on who got there first.
The British in 1690? expelled by the Spanish in 1770, and although they returned on threat of war, they left again by 1776 in the face of overwhelming problems elsewhere (American War of Independence).
the French in 1764? no, they ceded their claim to Spain.
Spain? the islands were under spanish control when the British left and from 1774 were ruled as part of the Viceroyalty of the River Plate - this became Argentina in 1816.
in 1833 the british removed the argentinians by arriving with superior numbers of forces, the argentinians left as they had little option to do otherwise.
so is possession 90% of the law? or was that possession obtained illegally?
The British in 1690? expelled by the Spanish in 1770, and although they returned on threat of war, they left again by 1776 in the face of overwhelming problems elsewhere (American War of Independence).
the French in 1764? no, they ceded their claim to Spain.
Spain? the islands were under spanish control when the British left and from 1774 were ruled as part of the Viceroyalty of the River Plate - this became Argentina in 1816.
in 1833 the british removed the argentinians by arriving with superior numbers of forces, the argentinians left as they had little option to do otherwise.
so is possession 90% of the law? or was that possession obtained illegally?
"Trying to link the genuine rights of the Falkland Islanders with the British Empire is a bunch of horse manure"
I'm not sure about that. The settlement of the islands is whether we like it or not part of British imperial history, that's just a fact. The situation would not exist as it does without it. The controversy is over what that means - there's no logical reason it should change the fact that the islanders wish to remain British.
--
What I dislike was AOG's implication (by including Paxman) that it is 'traitorous', unpatriotic or 'self-hating' to have a view of the British empire which is remotely critical. I find that an extremely ugly suggestion.
I'm not sure about that. The settlement of the islands is whether we like it or not part of British imperial history, that's just a fact. The situation would not exist as it does without it. The controversy is over what that means - there's no logical reason it should change the fact that the islanders wish to remain British.
--
What I dislike was AOG's implication (by including Paxman) that it is 'traitorous', unpatriotic or 'self-hating' to have a view of the British empire which is remotely critical. I find that an extremely ugly suggestion.
Latest Posts
News2 mins ago
News3 mins ago
News3 mins ago
Why Is The "Police Watchdog...
News4 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles11 mins ago
