John52 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 or at least what freedoms we have. It wasn't the Establishment Royalty, their Military or Politicians. It was these guys. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/16/manchester-gets-ready-for-noisy-tribute-to-the-dead-of-peterloo Don't let the Establishment tell you they won our freedom. *-) But compare the monuments we have to the guys who really won our Freedom, with the monuments we have to Royalty etc - who never lifted a finger to help us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunsterJohn Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 John52 - 2019-08-16 12:27 PM or at least what freedoms we have. It wasn't the Establishment Royalty, their Military or Politicians. It was these guys. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/16/manchester-gets-ready-for-noisy-tribute-to-the-dead-of-peterloo Don't let the Establishment tell you they won our freedom. *-) But compare the monuments we have to the guys who really won our Freedom, with the monuments we have to Royalty etc - who never lifted a finger to help us. I don't understand. Your moan a few days ago was about how the Monarch has this absolute power over parliament and the armed forces. How then did we manage to get these freedoms? Surely the monarch would have stamped down hard using the government? Something's not making sense here. As for your 'freedom fighters' only a single-issue moron would assume that without these protesters we'd still be serfs. Nations progress over centuries. We become more liberal and enlightened and the real contributors to our liberties are actually the enlightened upper classes and MPs. However our most important freedoms in the last century were granted by those whom you appear to despise, our armed forces who defeated Facism. If it wasn't for them you'd probably be a slave labourer speaking either German or Russian. If we hadn't fought Germany, whoever won, Stalin or Hitler, would have come for us next. As Adolph tried to of course until our brave fighter pilots, at a huge cost to themselves, defeated the Luftwaffe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 16, 2019 Author Share Posted August 16, 2019 FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 1:11 PM Something's not making sense here. . True, you're not making sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 16, 2019 Author Share Posted August 16, 2019 FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 1:11 PM Surely the monarch would have stamped down hard using the government? . Yes, thats what the Memorial for the Peterloo Massacre is about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 16, 2019 Author Share Posted August 16, 2019 FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 1:11 PM Nations progress over centuries. We become more liberal and enlightened Some of us have due to political reformers like the Chartists, Suffragettes, and those massacred at Peterloo by Her Majesty's Armed Forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunsterJohn Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 John52 - 2019-08-16 3:24 PM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 1:11 PM Something's not making sense here. . True, you're not making sense. Your usual obfuscation when you're in a corner. You said:'... wasn't the Establishment Royalty, their Military or Politicians.' 'Their military and politicians.' So I ask again. If as you claim the Monarch has absolute control over the armed forces and Parliament, how have we managed to get all the freedoms that we now enjoy? It can only be because the monarchy doesn't actually have the power you constantly bang on about, and if it does have the power shouldn't we be thanking it for being enlightened? Which is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 16, 2019 Author Share Posted August 16, 2019 If we hadn't fought Germany, whoever won, Stalin or Hitler, would have come for us next. . Stalin nearly did, because our intervention saved Stalin so he was strong enough to threaten us. Britain declared war on Germany to get Hitler out of Poland, then left Poland with Stalin who was worse. According to Portillos Secret History on TV, Churchill finally realised this in 1945 and wanted us to join the remnants of Hitler's Army to fight Stalin!!!!!!! Fortunately wiser heads prevailed, because having destroyed Hitler's Army we were no longer strong enough. Hence the Cold War etc. The lads who had ther worst job of the war on the Arctic Convoys following Churchills Orders to take much needed supplies from Britain to Stalin, were simply ignored in Churchills VE Day Speech and denied medals because their following his orders had become an embarrasement to him. Anyway this thread is about who won our freedoms. Even if you believe all the wartime propoganda, that would only be who maintained our freedoms, not who won them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 16, 2019 Author Share Posted August 16, 2019 FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 2:37 PM how have we managed to get all the freedoms that we now enjoy? By political reformers like the early trade unions, Chartists, Suffragettes who broke the law. Of course they don't get official recognition because Establishment doesn't want to admit some lawbreakers have done us good. Because most lawbreakers are bad and will try to bask in the glory of the lawbreakers who won our freedoms many years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunsterJohn Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 John52 - 2019-08-16 3:25 PM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 1:11 PM Surely the monarch would have stamped down hard using the government? . Yes, thats what the Memorial for the Peterloo Massacre is about. Are you ignorant or lying again? The order to charge on the protesters was given by an over zealous magistrate and was nothing to do with the monarchy. I thought you'd have known that. Apparently not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 16, 2019 Author Share Posted August 16, 2019 FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 1:11 PM Nations progress over centuries.. Some do, some don't. The religious nutcase nations who stone women to death for adultery are not that different to Britain when it burned people at the stake for their religious beliefs or 'witchcraft'. They are just like we were a few centuries ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunsterJohn Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 John52 - 2019-08-16 3:38 PM If we hadn't fought Germany, whoever won, Stalin or Hitler, would have come for us next. . Stalin nearly did, because our intervention saved Stalin so he was strong enough to threaten us. Britain declared war on Germany to get Hitler out of Poland, then left Poland with Stalin who was worse. According to Portillos Secret History on TV, Churchill finally realised this in 1945 and wanted us to join the remnants of Hitler's Army to fight Stalin!!!!!!! Fortunately wiser heads prevailed, because having destroyed Hitler's Army we were no longer strong enough. Hence the Cold War etc. The lads who had ther worst job of the war on the Arctic Convoys following Churchills Orders to take much needed supplies from Britain to Stalin, were simply ignored in Churchills VE Day Speech and denied medals because their following his orders had become an embarrasement to him. Anyway this thread is about who won our freedoms. Even if you believe all the wartime propoganda, that would only be who maintained our freedoms, not who won them. Yes it's a thread about those who won our freedoms but as usual you can't resist seguing into something else that you can whinge about. If we hadn't had the thuggish Chartists and the suffragettes etc we'd still have all the freedoms we enjoy today because the people mainly responsible are actually liberal minded parliamentarians and monarchs. Sixteen people died in Manchester. How many died fighting the Nazis so that you can spout your vitriol today? Moral force' Chartists such as William Lovett believed that tactics such as holding public meetings, publishing pamphlets and newspapers, and taking petitions to government would succeed in convincing those in power of the moral right of electoral reform. However, many people believed that electoral reform would not be achieved through the use of 'moral force' alone. 'Physical force' Chartists, such as Feargus O’Connor, advocated the use of violence to demand the six points of the Charter be granted, should that not be achieved by peaceful means. The more radical Chartists took part in riots in Newcastle, Birmingham and elsewhere round the country, at which leading members of the movement were arrested. The most infamous episode in the history of Chartism was the disatrous Newport Rising, which took place on 4th November 1839. A group of Chartists stormed a hotel and 22 of the protestors were killed by waiting troops. For a while the energy went out of the movement, though the National Charter Association was established in 1840 to co-ordinate its work across the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunsterJohn Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 John52 - 2019-08-16 3:46 PM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 1:11 PM Nations progress over centuries.. Some do, some don't. The religious nutcase nations who stone women to death for adultery are not that different to Britain when it burned people at the stake for their religious beliefs or 'witchcraft'. They are just like we were a few centuries ago. Well, that's Islam for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 John52 - 2019-08-16 2:46 PM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 1:11 PM Nations progress over centuries.. Some do, some don't. The religious nutcase nations who stone women to death for adultery are not that different to Britain when it burned people at the stake for their religious beliefs or 'witchcraft'. They are just like we were a few centuries ago. Corbyn's Labour clearly hasn't *-) ......... He's reawakened the Socialist's natural antisemitic bias ........Just like Hitler did :-| .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 16, 2019 Author Share Posted August 16, 2019 FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 2:50 PM the people mainly responsible are actually liberal minded parliamentarians. only because the political activists got us the right to vote them in. The most oppressed countries have strong armies and monarchs, like Britain had when it was most oppressed. Yet by your mad hatter logic it was them who won our freedoms *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunsterJohn Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 John52 - 2019-08-16 5:33 PM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 2:50 PM the people mainly responsible are actually liberal minded parliamentarians. only because the political activists got us the right to vote them in. The most oppressed countries have strong armies and monarchs, like Britain had when it was most oppressed. Yet by your mad hatter logic it was them who won our freedoms *-) But according to you the monarchy has absolute power over the army and government. Yet they allowed all these reforms? It seems they're not so bad after all. Thanks for confirming my respect for the monarchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 16, 2019 Author Share Posted August 16, 2019 FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 5:24 PM But according to you the monarchy has absolute power over the army and government. Yet they allowed all these reforms? They allowed the Peterloo Massacre and others. And continue to resist reforms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 John52 - 2019-08-16 11:15 PM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 5:24 PM But according to you the monarchy has absolute power over the army and government. Yet they allowed all these reforms? They allowed the Peterloo Massacre and others. And continue to resist reforms. So er Madge who was born in 1926 allowed the 1819 massacre? :-| .......... Have you considered therapy? ;-) ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunsterJohn Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 John52 - 2019-08-17 12:15 AM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 5:24 PM But according to you the monarchy has absolute power over the army and government. Yet they allowed all these reforms? They allowed the Peterloo Massacre and others. And continue to resist reforms. More lies. Have you no shame? The monarch wasn't consulted about the stupid actions of a local magistrate. But once more, you bleat ad nauseum about the monarch's absolute power over the army and parliament. It appears that this is another lie. If so they'd have used that power to suppress reforms. Unless of course they are not the uncaring despots you suggest they are? You're in another corner here, again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fast Pat Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 FunsterJohn - 2019-08-17 7:33 AM John52 - 2019-08-17 12:15 AM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 5:24 PM But according to you the monarchy has absolute power over the army and government. Yet they allowed all these reforms? They allowed the Peterloo Massacre and others. And continue to resist reforms. More lies. Have you no shame? The monarch wasn't consulted about the stupid actions of a local magistrate. But once more, you bleat ad nauseum about the monarch's absolute power over the army and parliament. It appears that this is another lie. If so they'd have used that power to suppress reforms. Unless of course they are not the uncaring despots you suggest they are? You're in another corner here, again! Nope you are wrong again. The government declared its support for the actions taken by the magistrates and the army. The Manchester magistrates held a supposedly public meeting on 19 August, so that resolutions supporting the action they had taken three days before could be published. Cotton merchants Archibald Prentice (later editor of The Manchester Times) and Absalom Watkin (a later corn-law reformer), both members of the Little Circle, organised a petition of protest against the violence at St Peter's Field and the validity of the magistrate's meeting. Within a few days it had collected 4,800 signatures.[93] Nevertheless, the Home Secretary, Lord Sidmouth, on 27 August conveyed to the magistrates the thanks of the Prince Regent for their action in the "preservation of the public peace."[6] That public exoneration was met with fierce anger and criticism. During a debate at Hopkins Street Robert Wedderburn declared "The Prince is a fool with his Wonderful letters of thanks ... What is the Prince Regent or King to us, we want no King – he is no use to us."[94] In an open letter, Richard Carlile said: Unless the Prince calls his ministers to account and relieved his people, he would surely be deposed and make them all REPUBLICANS, despite all adherence to ancient and established institutions.[ For a few months following Peterloo it seemed to the authorities that the country was heading towards an armed rebellion. Encouraging them in that belief were two abortive uprisings, in Huddersfield and Burnley, the Yorkshire West Riding Revolt, during the autumn of 1820, and the discovery and foiling of the Cato Street conspiracy to blow up the cabinet that winter.[95] By the end of the year, the government had introduced legislation, later known as the Six Acts, to suppress radical meetings and publications, and by the end of 1820 every significant working-class radical reformer was in jail; civil liberties had declined to an even lower level than they were before Peterloo. Historian Robert Reid has written that "it is not fanciful to compare the restricted freedoms of the British worker in the post-Peterloo period in the early nineteenth century with those of the black South African in the post-Sharpeville period of the late twentieth century."" From Wikipedia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunsterJohn Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 Fast Pat - 2019-08-17 9:45 AM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-17 7:33 AM John52 - 2019-08-17 12:15 AM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 5:24 PM But according to you the monarchy has absolute power over the army and government. Yet they allowed all these reforms? They allowed the Peterloo Massacre and others. And continue to resist reforms. More lies. Have you no shame? The monarch wasn't consulted about the stupid actions of a local magistrate. But once more, you bleat ad nauseum about the monarch's absolute power over the army and parliament. It appears that this is another lie. If so they'd have used that power to suppress reforms. Unless of course they are not the uncaring despots you suggest they are? You're in another corner here, again! Nope you are wrong again. The government declared its support for the actions taken by the magistrates and the army. The Manchester magistrates held a supposedly public meeting on 19 August, so that resolutions supporting the action they had taken three days before could be published. Cotton merchants Archibald Prentice (later editor of The Manchester Times) and Absalom Watkin (a later corn-law reformer), both members of the Little Circle, organised a petition of protest against the violence at St Peter's Field and the validity of the magistrate's meeting. Within a few days it had collected 4,800 signatures.[93] Nevertheless, the Home Secretary, Lord Sidmouth, on 27 August conveyed to the magistrates the thanks of the Prince Regent for their action in the "preservation of the public peace."[6] That public exoneration was met with fierce anger and criticism. During a debate at Hopkins Street Robert Wedderburn declared "The Prince is a fool with his Wonderful letters of thanks ... What is the Prince Regent or King to us, we want no King – he is no use to us."[94] In an open letter, Richard Carlile said: Unless the Prince calls his ministers to account and relieved his people, he would surely be deposed and make them all REPUBLICANS, despite all adherence to ancient and established institutions.[ For a few months following Peterloo it seemed to the authorities that the country was heading towards an armed rebellion. Encouraging them in that belief were two abortive uprisings, in Huddersfield and Burnley, the Yorkshire West Riding Revolt, during the autumn of 1820, and the discovery and foiling of the Cato Street conspiracy to blow up the cabinet that winter.[95] By the end of the year, the government had introduced legislation, later known as the Six Acts, to suppress radical meetings and publications, and by the end of 1820 every significant working-class radical reformer was in jail; civil liberties had declined to an even lower level than they were before Peterloo. Historian Robert Reid has written that "it is not fanciful to compare the restricted freedoms of the British worker in the post-Peterloo period in the early nineteenth century with those of the black South African in the post-Sharpeville period of the late twentieth century."" From Wikipedia Well it was 200 years ago and of course,after such an event, the government would support the forces of law and order. But can you show me where the monarch or the government had any part in the decision to send in the Yeomanry? That was stupid error by a hard line local magistrate, but again, it was 200 years ago when things were very different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 17, 2019 Author Share Posted August 17, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-08-16 11:21 PM John52 - 2019-08-16 11:15 PM FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 5:24 PM But according to you the monarchy has absolute power over the army and government. Yet they allowed all these reforms? They allowed the Peterloo Massacre and others. And continue to resist reforms. So er Madge who was born in 1926 allowed the 1819 massacre? :-| .......... Have you considered therapy? ;-) ........... I said the Monarchy, If you had any common sense it would have told you there has been more than one holder of that title. The current one continues to resist reform. When they introduced the Employment Protection Act, Freedom of Information Act etc they had to exempt her to get her to pass it. >:-) She proved she was above the law by suddently at the last moment 'remembering' she had given permission to Paul Burrel to take the items he was charged with stealing, avoiding herself being called to court to give evidence and for the first time in her life being questioned. Why wasn't she charged with wasting police time *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 17, 2019 Author Share Posted August 17, 2019 She won't answer questions. All we hear is the sh*te pumped out by her spin doctors at her press office. They have done a good job of presenting her with a middle class image, despite all her palaces and hangers on. But who really knows what they are like? You can only go on what they do. Which is live behind barriers at vast expense to the rest of us - including the poor, and resist any real reforms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 17, 2019 Author Share Posted August 17, 2019 FunsterJohn - 2019-08-17 8:58 AM it was 200 years ago when things were very different. Really, Judges are appointed by the Prime Minister under the Royal Prerogative given to him by Her Unelected Majesty the Queen. (Thus ensuring the Prime Minister supports her) But the power is still hers. You are effectively saying she has power without responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted August 17, 2019 Author Share Posted August 17, 2019 FunsterJohn - 2019-08-16 2:42 PM Are you ignorant or lying again? The order to charge on the protesters was given by an over zealous magistrate and was nothing to do with the monarchy. I thought you'd have known that. Apparently not. The Prince Regent clearly supported it. So who is 'ignorant or lying again' *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 I've just remembered another reason why I'm a Royalist ;-) ........... They annoy the hell out of Loony Lefties (lol) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.