The “ I’ve got something to say, but it doesn’t warrant its own thread “ thread.

[Sampson]

9 hours ago, Foxdiamond said:

I would guess a lot of people from a lot of places have little interest or knowledge of history. Too many have the attitude before my time. 

Oh yes, don't get me wrong, it was not saying people from other countries are any different, it was just in response to bovril's post - saying you can't expect us to care about other countries halfway across the globe when so many don't even know about the more recent (post-ww1) divide with our closest geographical and closest cultural neighbours, part of which is still even part of Britain.

 

I think most people in most countries just don't really care that much about history if we're honest.

Edited 22 hours ago by Sampson

[Foxdiamond]

38 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Oh yes, don't get me wrong, it was not saying people from other countries are any different, it was just in response to bovril's post - saying you can't expect us to care about other countries halfway across the globe when so many don't even know about the more recent (post-ww1) divide with our closest geographical and closest cultural neighbours, part of which is still even part of Britain.

 

I think most people in most countries just don't really care that much about history if we're honest.

Agree with you. Even trivial things like quizzes. Ask when was King John around and some people are hundreds of years out.

[The Bear]

49 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

Agree with you. Even trivial things like quizzes. Ask when was King John around and some people are hundreds of years out.

I must admit English kings and queens are a weak spot in my knowledge. I keep meaning to get round to learning them better or buying David Mitchell's book but I never seem to get round to it. 

 

I took a guess at King John just as around 13th/14th century and so was a good 200 years out. 

[davieG]

On 15/12/2025 at 20:42, davieG said:

Evri a pile of smelly dog shit of a company. Everytime they fail to deliver as promised and then add 3 or more days to the eta of when they might feel like delivering your package. 
 

They used to be Hermes but earned a reputation so bad they had to rebrand unfortunately they are as bad if not worse now. 

Courier Checker  ·

Follow

 

Evri are suing the BBC over claims some couriers earn below minimum wage. Bold, given what a proper look around their depots might turn up.

 

 

I thought they were getting better as my last two orders arrived on time. However I tried to return an item the other day through Amazon and the return Courier was Evri, when I clicked on their return options neither worked. Amazon ended up refunding me and telling me I didn't need to return the item - I wander who pays for that? I can't imagine it's super rich Amazon, I hope it's not the seller although they did choose to use Evri.

[Foxdiamond]

12 minutes ago, The Bear said:

I must admit English kings and queens are a weak spot in my knowledge. I keep meaning to get round to learning them better or buying David Mitchell's book but I never seem to get round to it. 

 

I took a guess at King John just as around 13th/14th century and so was a good 200 years out. 

The David Mitchell book is a fun way of learning more. I noticed celebrities on House of Games often way out on the history round I'm Terrible At Dating.  Made me think how little people know about basic facts in our history. I guess unless you enjoyed the subject as a youngster folk bin it when leaving school 

[Zear0]

1 hour ago, Foxdiamond said:

The David Mitchell book is a fun way of learning more. I noticed celebrities on House of Games often way out on the history round I'm Terrible At Dating.  Made me think how little people know about basic facts in our history. I guess unless you enjoyed the subject as a youngster folk bin it when leaving school 

As evidenced by some of the more unlettered contributors to the General News thread, there is a huge percentage of the population who don’t read and are sneerful of those who do as it often shines a mirror on their own ignorance.

[Foxdiamond]

4 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

As evidenced by some of the more unlettered contributors to the General News thread, there is a huge percentage of the population who don’t read and are sneerful of those who do as it often shines a mirror on their own ignorance.

I do that also  think that too many are only focused on their own immediate wants and gratification without considering their environment and the people around them.  Not talking about the bigger world but more their close neighbours or people they come across.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

I do that also  think that too many are only focused on their own immediate wants and gratification without considering their environment and the people around them.  Not talking about the bigger world but more their close neighbours or people they come across.

And behaviour regarding the latter almost always informs the former, too. To everyone's consequence.

[Sampson]

2 hours ago, The Bear said:

I must admit English kings and queens are a weak spot in my knowledge. I keep meaning to get round to learning them better or buying David Mitchell's book but I never seem to get round to it. 

 

I took a guess at King John just as around 13th/14th century and so was a good 200 years out. 

We learnt a song of all the Kings and Queens from 1066 onwards in primary school, I still remember it to this day:

 

Will, Will, Harry, Stee.

Harry, Dick, John, Harry three.

One two three Neds, Richard two,

Henrys four, five, six, then who?

 

Edwards four, five, Dick the bad,

Henrys twain and Ned the Lad

Mary, Bessie, James the vain,

Then Charlie, Charlie, James again.

 

William and Mary, Anna Gloria,

Four Georges, William and Victoria,

Edward, George then Edward eight,

Married and had to abdicate.

 

Then came George the sixth's reign, 

And now we have Queen Bess again.

And after that, if all goes right,

King Charles will reign with all his might.

Edited 18 hours ago by Sampson

[Thefox81]

22 minutes ago, Sampson said:

We learnt a song of all the Kings and Queens from 1066 onwards in primary school, I still remember it to this day:

 

Will, Will, Harry, Stee.

Harry, Dick, John, Harry three.

One two three Neds, Richard two,

Henrys four, five, six, then who?

 

Edwards four, five, Dick the bad,

Henrys twain and Ned the Lad

Mary, Bessie, James the vain,

Then Charlie, Charlie, James again.

 

William and Mary, Anna Gloria,

Four Georges, William and Victoria,

Edward, George then Edward eight,

Married and had to abdicate.

 

Then came George the sixth's reign, 

And now we have Queen Bess again.

And after that, if all goes right,

King Charles will reign with all his might.

Thats brilliant. Never heard that before.

[bovril]

3 hours ago, The Bear said:

I must admit English kings and queens are a weak spot in my knowledge. I keep meaning to get round to learning them better or buying David Mitchell's book but I never seem to get round to it. 

 

I took a guess at King John just as around 13th/14th century and so was a good 200 years out. 

Reigned from the start of the 13th century so not that far out. 

[Corky]

1 hour ago, Sampson said:

We learnt a song of all the Kings and Queens from 1066 onwards in primary school, I still remember it to this day:

 

Will, Will, Harry, Stee.

Harry, Dick, John, Harry three.

One two three Neds, Richard two,

Henrys four, five, six, then who?

 

Edwards four, five, Dick the bad,

Henrys twain and Ned the Lad

Mary, Bessie, James the vain,

Then Charlie, Charlie, James again.

 

William and Mary, Anna Gloria,

Four Georges, William and Victoria,

Edward, George then Edward eight,

Married and had to abdicate.

 

Then came George the sixth's reign, 

And now we have Queen Bess again.

And after that, if all goes right,

King Charles will reign with all his might.

As is the modern way, does it scan to Freed From Desire?

[Sampson]

29 minutes ago, Corky said:

As is the modern way, does it scan to Freed From Desire?

Haha, the tune was actually a slight variation on "Skip to my lou, my darling".

[The Bear]

It's weird the stuff you remember crystal clear from school times. 

 

We learned Silent Night in German for our German GSCE, and we even had to go and sing it at the local church. I can still remember every word to this day. 

[davieG]

Interesting view although you can't ignore the fact that the British and French had little regard for the native population

 

A Force For Good

 

IN REMEMBRANCE OF THE BRITISH LOYALISTS

On this day, 4th July 1776, the Thirteen Colonies declared independence from Great Britain and the British Empire, in what has become known by Americans as "Independence Day". However, at the time, there were a great many who were loyal to Britain and they faced and suffered persecution. Many fled to British North America - which they created into the Canada we know today.

One of our readers left this comment:

(comment begins> "The Revolutionary War was an unnecessary war. America would have eventually reached independence – just like Australia and Canada – without all the killing and 10 years of misery.

"It was a war started by a rich American Elite who wanted to expand into protected Indian lands, westwards, to get even more money.

"The likes of Washington were concerned that following the Indian Wars – which the British had won – that they were vulnerable to a lower class increasingly unhappy with the wealth accumulated by the likes of Washington and unhappy with their own poor situation.

"So Washington and his slave-owning friends started to divert negative attention onto the British.

"The British were overnight denounced as an army of occupation, when a few years earlier the same boys in red had fought and died to protect Americans from the French and were heroes.

"They went from hero to zero in a year. Increased taxation was an elaborate lie to galvanise the masses with patriotic rhetoric. The revolution was a way for rich men to get richer by using mob rule to attack the new common enemy – the British!

"The Empire Loyalists actually outnumbered the American Rebels, but they were terrorised. They were also called 'Tories' and many of them were Scots. Property was destroyed and their families were targeted.

"This is where tarring and feathering – pouring boiling hot oil on people in the streets – started!

"The rebels operated like a bunch of terrorists and the British had to show restraint when fighting them, or risk pushing more into supporting the rebellion. Needless killing and a needless war!

"History is written by the victors but this period should be looked at through more honest glasses." <comment ends)

So while Americans remember their separation from Britain, we remember the United Empire Loyalists whose only crime was loyalty to George III.

It is due to them that Canada still has close ties to Britain and is a monarchy with the King as Head of State.

Pic: The United Empire Loyalists memorial in Hamilton, Ontario.

---

Please support our patriotic work at aforceforgood.uk/support

[DJW1]

2 hours ago, davieG said:

Interesting view although you can't ignore the fact that the British and French had little regard for the native population

 

A Force For Good

 

IN REMEMBRANCE OF THE BRITISH LOYALISTS

On this day, 4th July 1776, the Thirteen Colonies declared independence from Great Britain and the British Empire, in what has become known by Americans as "Independence Day". However, at the time, there were a great many who were loyal to Britain and they faced and suffered persecution. Many fled to British North America - which they created into the Canada we know today.

One of our readers left this comment:

(comment begins> "The Revolutionary War was an unnecessary war. America would have eventually reached independence – just like Australia and Canada – without all the killing and 10 years of misery.

"It was a war started by a rich American Elite who wanted to expand into protected Indian lands, westwards, to get even more money.

"The likes of Washington were concerned that following the Indian Wars – which the British had won – that they were vulnerable to a lower class increasingly unhappy with the wealth accumulated by the likes of Washington and unhappy with their own poor situation.

"So Washington and his slave-owning friends started to divert negative attention onto the British.

"The British were overnight denounced as an army of occupation, when a few years earlier the same boys in red had fought and died to protect Americans from the French and were heroes.

"They went from hero to zero in a year. Increased taxation was an elaborate lie to galvanise the masses with patriotic rhetoric. The revolution was a way for rich men to get richer by using mob rule to attack the new common enemy – the British!

"The Empire Loyalists actually outnumbered the American Rebels, but they were terrorised. They were also called 'Tories' and many of them were Scots. Property was destroyed and their families were targeted.

"This is where tarring and feathering – pouring boiling hot oil on people in the streets – started!

"The rebels operated like a bunch of terrorists and the British had to show restraint when fighting them, or risk pushing more into supporting the rebellion. Needless killing and a needless war!

"History is written by the victors but this period should be looked at through more honest glasses." <comment ends)

So while Americans remember their separation from Britain, we remember the United Empire Loyalists whose only crime was loyalty to George III.

It is due to them that Canada still has close ties to Britain and is a monarchy with the King as Head of State.

Pic: The United Empire Loyalists memorial in Hamilton, Ontario.

---

Please support our patriotic work at aforceforgood.uk/support

Ironically, George Washington fought FOR the British against the French in 1754-8. 

I have read that initially the colonists still considered themselves British, but were cheesed off with the taxes they had to pay, their motto being "No tax without representation" (in the London parliament).

The French played an important role in what became the War Of Independence, their warships preventing movement of British troops (and foreign mercenaries) and arms up the East coast of America. Modern Americans seem reluctant to mention that, perhaps explaining the France-USA antagonism. 

In the 1950s some French politicians were demanding that all American troops left French soil. An American wag replied "Does that include all the dead ones?"

[Foxdiamond]

29 minutes ago, DJW1 said:

Ironically, George Washington fought FOR the British against the French in 1754-8. 

I have read that initially the colonists still considered themselves British, but were cheesed off with the taxes they had to pay, their motto being "No tax without representation" (in the London parliament).

The French played an important role in what became the War Of Independence, their warships preventing movement of British troops (and foreign mercenaries) and arms up the East coast of America. Modern Americans seem reluctant to mention that, perhaps explaining the France-USA antagonism. 

In the 1950s some French politicians were demanding that all American troops left French soil. An American wag replied "Does that include all the dead ones?"

Didn't the Americans invade Canada in the revolution and again in 1812 thinking it would a walkover and expected the French speakers in particular to welcome them and got a bloody nose from the British and Canadians

[DJW1]

I couldn't tell you. I used up all my knowledge of British-American conflicts in my previous comment!

[Wymsey]

It's weird seeing a Christmas film on the TV guide in early July.. 

Edited 7 hours ago by Wymsey

[Jon the Hat]

On 02/07/2026 at 05:56, Grebfromgrebland said:

I hope you answered that by saying that you have an above average number of arms.

Never joke with Americans in any sort of position of Authority, even the hospital receptionist.  They take themselves very seriously.

[Trav Le Bleu]

21 hours ago, Sampson said:

Oh yes, don't get me wrong, it was not saying people from other countries are any different, it was just in response to bovril's post - saying you can't expect us to care about other countries halfway across the globe when so many don't even know about the more recent (post-ww1) divide with our closest geographical and closest cultural neighbours, part of which is still even part of Britain.

 

I think most people in most countries just don't really care that much about history if we're honest.

Then we're doomed to make the same mistakes as those who went before.

[Trav Le Bleu]

5 hours ago, Wymsey said:

It's weird seeing a Christmas film on the TV guide in early July.. 

Die Hard?

[Trav Le Bleu]

8 hours ago, DJW1 said:

I couldn't tell you. I used up all my knowledge of British-American conflicts in my previous comment!

Well we're 1-0 up in terms of burning down the leaders residence.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Then we're doomed to make the same mistakes as those who went before.

True. 

 

The real ballache though, is knowing about history, and seeing other people read it, and still make the same mistakes because it somehow suits them and theirs.