Mass protest in Iran

[+joc]

6 hours ago, Setton said:

7 hours ago, joc said:

 You said England had a parliament.   But was it a Constitutional Monarchy as what you have today?  

Yes. 

How would you know?  You don't even know how your own Monarchy interacts with Parliament much less King George of the 16th century...besides, I wasn't asking you...a hostile to me poster...I was asking @Grey Area

Edited January 17, 2020 by joc

[Setton]

3 hours ago, joc said:

How would you know?  You don't even know how your own Monarchy interacts with Parliament much less King George of the 16th century...besides, I wasn't asking you...a hostile to me poster...I was asking @Grey Area

It's a public forum. Anyone is entitled to respond to any post. And you obviously need all the help you can get. 

Oh, and there was no King George in the 16th century. 

[Setton]

3 hours ago, joc said:

 The Parliament tells the Queen the best course of action.  The Parliament writes her speeches.  The Parliament decides how you are going to be ruled.  The Queen goes along with what ever The Parliament decides is in the best course of action for the country.

And she has the power to overrule what parliament decides. She doesn't use it, but she does have that power. 

[+joc]

1 hour ago, Setton said:

She doesn't use it

I rest my case...thank you

[Grey Area]

6 hours ago, joc said:

How would you know?  You don't even know how your own Monarchy interacts with Parliament much less King George of the 16th century...besides, I wasn't asking you...a hostile to me poster...I was asking @Grey Area

I didn’t respond because this is a thread about Iran, and given how easy it is to find out the questions you are asking, I can only see it as some sort of baiting.

In answer to the theme, any form of government can be tyrannical, what matters in this context is that the wealthy elite at the time declared it so, and rallied the commoners in rebellion, and I do genuinely feel it was for the better ultimately.  Would it have made a difference if the U.K. had been a republic, or a dictatorship?  Not at all, all that mattered at the outbreak of hostilities was taxation without representation.

[+joc]

2 hours ago, Setton said:

It's a public forum. Anyone is entitled to respond to any post. And you obviously need all the help you can get. 

Oh, and there was no King George in the 16th century. 

16th century, 18 century, what's a couple of hundred years between friends...

I will just say that you are correct on all counts.  I do need all the help I can get...and we inadvertently helped me.   

So, I am pretty up to speed on at least the 16th century.  I just read quite a bit about all that...

A HISTORY OF ENGLAND IN THE 16TH CENTURY

By Tim Lambert 

Quite interesting I must say.  

Gives quite a bit of insight as to the whole Freedom of Religion thing.  

Also to this song I remember from when I was a kid:  Henry the 8th I am, I am.  Henry the 8th, I am, I am.  I got married to the widow next door...she'd been married 7 times before and every one was a Henry, a Henry, a Henry, Every one was a Henry...so Henry the 8th I am. 

Edit:  Just read quite a bit about the History of England in the 17 century.  You are right...I knew nothing about the History of England. 

Back to Iran

 

 

Edited January 17, 2020 by joc

[+joc]

3 minutes ago, Grey Area said:

I didn’t respond because this is a thread about Iran, and given how easy it is to find out the questions you are asking, I can only see it as some sort of baiting.

In answer to the theme, any form of government can be tyrannical, what matters in this context is that the wealthy elite at the time declared it so, and rallied the commoners in rebellion, and I do genuinely feel it was for the better ultimately.  Would it have made a difference if the U.K. had been a republic, or a dictatorship?  Not at all, all that mattered at the outbreak of hostilities was taxation without representation.

Nah, I wasn't baiting you.  Thanks for your answer though.