The Off Topic Topic

[Admiral Yi]

Fake sugar

[garbon]

Actually the Splenda packets I'd bought in the US and brought over the leftovers.

What is Splenda?

Do you actually live in the world? First pho, now this!

[derspiess]

Actually the Splenda packets I'd bought in the US and brought over the leftovers.

OMG SMUGGLER

[garbon]

Actually the Splenda packets I'd bought in the US and brought over the leftovers.

OMG SMUGGLER

I don't think Splenda is a banned food and I've had the packets for more than 6 months.

[mongers]

Actually the Splenda packets I'd bought in the US and brought over the leftovers.

What is Splenda?

Do you actually live in the world? First pho, now this!

No? 

I did google to find out what it was, but no, had no idea, I don't generally ever see adverts and that lane/section of the grocery store would be one I never go done/look at.

[garbon]

Actually the Splenda packets I'd bought in the US and brought over the leftovers.

What is Splenda?

Do you actually live in the world? First pho, now this!

No? 

I did google to find out what it was, but no, had no idea, I don't generally ever see adverts and that lane/section of the grocery store would be one I never go done/look at.

I first used it, 8 years ago in the UK when a friend offered it to me for my tea.

[derspiess]

I don't think Splenda is a banned food and I've had the packets for more than 6 months.

Yeah, save it for the customs agent watching you on CCTV.

[Ed Anger]

Somebody is getting a cavity search.

[garbon]

Somebody is getting a cavity search.

Is that supposed be a bad thing?

[Razgovory]

I think a foreign army landing on the shores of England helped their causes quite a bit.  The last time Parliament tried to take out the king it turned into a big deal.

Indeed and it turned it to be a big deal this time as well.  England was not James' only Kingdom.

I do see a connection between the a foreign army invading and suppressing a religious with the support of some of the elites and a foreign army invading and suppressing a religious group with the support to some of the elites.

This is what I don't get. I never said anything about religion at all, I was talking about parliament, yet you said 'Marshall Petain had a similar line of thinking'. No he didn't. He did not feel that way about the National Assembly. I guess due to the fact that there were religious matters involved in both connects them in some way. Does this mean the Emperor Hadrian or the Crusades were also connected to the Glorious Revolution? Hindu persecution by the Mughal Empire? The Spanish Conquest of Mexico?

In both cases the elites of the invaded country papered over the invasion by declaring it a "revolution".  The big difference between them was that one country had it's invasion and "revolution" overturned by another invasion, and one did not.

In one case Parliament invited a claimant to the English throne to come give it a go, like they had for centuries. The "revolution" was not papering over a Dutch occupation, the "revolution" was getting William to agree to all the limits on his power and establishing a permanently protestant England.  And the army that invaded was a mercenary army that included many Britons, its main thing was it was Protestant and thus not seen as fully foreign by many of the English. Indeed if one were to read what the supporters of William were saying at the time one could be forgiven for thinking James was the foreigner. This is because people thought differently about things in the 17th century than they do today. Far from "papering over" the arrival of William's Army the people were cheering them in the streets.

The revolution in France was not the German invasion, it was the 10th of July 1940 maneuverings of Pierre Laval that ended the 3rd Republic and established an authoritarian state. The idea being that fascism had proven itself superior to decadent capitalism because of our humiliating defeat and with this system we shall rebuild a strong France inside of a fascist Europe. How is that papering over anything? How is this thinking in anyway similar to what Parliament was thinking during the Glorious Revolution?

If say the Stuarts were reinstalled by another invasion, the participants of the "Glorious Revolution", would have almost certainly have been hung as traitors.

The Stuarts did this once before after a revolution and they hung a few ringleaders leaving the vast majority of the parliamentary side alive. So no need to get all theoretical. But in neither case do I think it was treason. But then I am not a royalist.

If the Axis had won the war, it's unlikely Laval probably wouldn't have been shot.

I suppose. So? I mean even Laval knew he was taking a risk there. I guess the question is: was Laval a traitor? If you really thought he was being earnest about wanting to revitalize France and he just happened to be fascist I don't think you could. He crosses the line later when he uses the Germans to force Vichy to take him back after he tossed them though. At that point he is most certainly acting as an agent of Germany against France and a case could made. After that I think he would have been seen as a contemptible traitor even if the Axis had somehow won. Oh and an invading Army did not end Vichy unless you consider the German occupation of unoccupied France an invasion. For the record I also do not think treason was the right charge for Petain either.

Well ok I guess you might get them for undermining France's ability to carry on the war, a little encouragement from Petain might have given Paul Reynaud the guts he needed to go to North Africa and carry on the war. But I don't think that was what the dinged Petain for, though I do not recall the details of his trial.

Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.

Well you might not dare but I am not terribly worried about being put to death by the English Parliament of 1688 or the Provisional French Government of 1945 so I think I do dare.

But again how does any of this show that the Parliaments who supported William and later the Hanoverians had thinking similar to Petain?

You did mention religion when you said the "the Stuarts and the Catholics".  For France it's "the Socialists and Jews".  The persecution of an undesirable religious minority was a major factor.  Simply because some members of Parliament invited a foreign army to invade doesn't make it less of an invasion.  There were Frenchmen who vocally supported Hitler over Blum or took money from the Mussolini before the war. Pointing out that Dutch Army was partially mercenary is silly.  That was the norm.  Germany was a bit out of the ordinary in that it had a lot of foreign volunteers serving in their military as well.

But for you finial question the answer is simply.  The parliamentarians who supported William were similar to Petain in that they supported a foreign head of state's invasion and deposition of their own government and enthusiastically supported the new regime.  We typically call this treason.  The original topic was the Wilimite flag which is used as a triumphalist flag to impress the on Catholic Irish their place in the world.  The idea that it symbolizes loyalty strikes me as absurd since it's the flag of a foreign king who conquered England and overthrew the lawful king with the help of collaborators.  To me it sounds a lot like waving the Nazi flag or Marshal Petain's standard in front of Jews and say it's a symbol of loyalty.

[The Brain]

Somebody is getting a cavity search.

Is that supposed be a bad thing?

Oh the huge cavity!

[garbon]

Somebody is getting a cavity search.

Is that supposed be a bad thing?

Oh the huge cavity!

[Syt]

Reading a book about daily life in 2nd century AD Roman Empire from Britain to Mesopotamia, from Augusta Treverorum to Leptis Magna. Decent reading, and the author keeps drawing parallels to modern life to make things a bit easier to understand which is to be expected in this kind of book which is aimed at a lay readership.

Then, suddenly, in a chapter about Alexandria, and its diversity in people: "It's like visting an Outer Rim planet in Star Wars." And no, there were no Star Wars comparisons before that.

[Maladict]

This eclipse is just terrible. It's so cloudy it didn't even get noticeably darker.

[Liep]

This eclipse is just terrible. It's so cloudy it didn't even get noticeably darker.

Same.