Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Interesting to see that an Olympic Gold medal winner did not know the answer (yesterday's celeb who wants to be a millionaire) and similarly half the audience.


Yet in Northern Ireland 'loyalists' are rioting over the flag not being continually flown over the City Hall.


The answer is easy, well at least I thought.

There are Three crosses in the Union Flag..


St. George's Cross,

the flag of England


http://www.know-britain.com/general/images/st_george_cross.jpg


St. Andrew's Cross,

the flag of Scotland


http://www.know-britain.com/general/images/st_andw_cross.jpg


St. Patrick's Cross,

the flag of Ireland


http://www.know-britain.com/general/images/st_patk_cross.jpg


http://www.know-britain.com/general/union_jack.html


Oh. So the question was Red Crosses. Well never mind cannot win them all


Fox

The contestents were Greg Rutherford, British long jump Gold medal and an older bloke. I am not having a poke at Rutherford, as half the audience got it wrong as well. I just thought that it was something that we all learnt at school - the three crosses of the countries that make up the UK (Wales doesn't count at of course it is a principality).


I thought it was ironic on day that they actually flew the Union flag in Belfast, that so many people in England didn't know what it was all about. Discuss.....


If the Daily Mail had their way they would of course deport all those that got the question wrong. Good think too!

That was a bit *whoosh* malumbu, are you saying it's a good idea that people who can't explain the Union Jack are deported?


I'm quite pleased that our nation doesn't chug on about flags like a bunch of retarded medievalists. It's pathetic.


Half the world speaks Eglish as a primary or functional language, so I can't really imagine that anyone outside of a housing estate bully gang imagines a flag is good for anything.

I hope you will not misconstrue my views as disrespect for your service and your sacrifice Top Banana.


War itself - the acquisition of territory, resources and the subjugation of people through violence and intimidation is an exceptionally medieval pursuit. The flag has a role to play within that context.


I don't believe that the application of military doctrine and practice in civil life could be described as anything other than medieval. It is most likely to be applied by paramilitary organizations, or those with aspirations to achieve power through violence and intimidation.


The UK still retains its 'Cool Britannia' attributes in South East Asia, and the flag design is still worn here by bright young things as a avidly as Brazil shirts used to be worn in London - a symbol of life and energy.


So maybe it does have a use - but that certainly doesn't involve tribal allegiances and a weapon of deportation.

No I was making an obtuse comment on nationality tests, whilst having a dig at a right wing 'black top' tabloid, and trying to bring what I see as ignorance and bigotry in Northern Ireland. Clearly three threads in one.


I liked the good old days when the national anthem was booed at Wembley matches, and fans paraded union flags rather than the flag of St George. Non of this nonsense Sheffield Wednesday brass band playing rule Britannia and God Save the Queen.


And then Billy Bragg really confused me.


Now that is five subjects on one thread.


I need to get myself a bottle of good English Ale. Oh my word my local supermarkets don't sell any. That's another two subjects related to being English, which is way down the list of how I would describe myself. Two more subjects.


But I did know how many red crosses there was in the flag of the Union.

On a related issue, the problem with complaining about the lack of Wesh representation in the Union Flag is that there wasn't a Welsh flag until relatively recently. The cross of St David is in all likelihood a 20th-century invention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Saint_David) and the "traditional" dragon flag in its current form is also 20th-century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Wales)... Which is not to say that there isn't an argument for incorporating a Welsh element, but it contradicts the idea that there was some sort of imperialist English conspiracy to exclude a Welsh element. A united Wales as we currently understand it simply didn't exist before its annexation.

"The Union Flag is sometimes known as the Union Jack after its creator, James I of England, James VI of Scots. Jack comes from the Latin for James, Jacobus.


James became King of Scots at one year old when his mother Mary Queen of Scots was deposed by rebel Scottish Lords. James patiently waited another thirty-five years until his aunt, Elizabeth I of England died and he succeeded to the throne of England.


James wanted to unite his two kingdoms but the Parliaments of the two sovereign nations opposed it vigorously. James persistently asked his Parliaments to bring about a plan for union but they continually came up with objections. Meanwhile, James did what he could to effect a unification. Firstly, he declared himself ?King of Great Britain?, a term he created for his new kingdom. James also minted a new coin, which could be used in either England or Scotland. He named it the ?Unite?. It was worth five shillings in Sterling and three pounds in Scots. (The Scottish currency had been greatly devalued during James reign in Scotland).


Most importantly, James created the new flag overlaying the English cross of St George on the Scottish cross of St Andrew to form a new National Flag. He rejected other designs suggested by his advisors on the grounds that they were not ?united?. The Union Flag was augmented in 1801 when Ireland became part of The United Kingdom."



Looks like it was originally created in 1606 when James was king of both England and Scotland and then with Ireland added in 1801 it became the Union Flag we know today. No mention of Wales, and the flag of St Patrick is no longer relevant with most of Ireland no longer being in the Union.


http://www.wardsbookofdays.com/12april.htm

Wales was relegated to a principality by Edward I, just to let the Tafs know their place and stop constatnly trying to rally around Kings (although I imagine the massive castles and murderous oppression were probaby more persuasive in that respect), hence Wales wasn't one of the three Kingdons and not worthy of an emblematic presence.

If the Welsh were to be given a stake in the country's emblem (assuming they'd want one) the Cornish would probably want one too - we could end up with something a lot more colourful...


http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT0np91mh8XgwV9Dywns4Yel9UmfENo_lBhgYODdDkICFizm3Nx_w


...now what's the flag for Bermondsey...?

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The Union Jack is only the Union Jack when it is

> on a ship. Otherwise its a flag.



This is a recent idea and a common misconception* - the flag was referred to as the Union Jack in the 17thC wherever it was flown.



*like 'tomorrow is the 17th'...

"The term 'Union Jack' possibly dates from Queen Anne's time (r. 1702-14), but its origin is uncertain.


It may come from the 'jack-et' of the English or Scottish soldiers, or from the name of James I who originated the first union in 1603.


Another alternative is that the name may be derived from a proclamation by Charles II that the Union Flag should be flown only by ships of the Royal Navy as a jack, a small flag at the bowsprit; the term 'jack' once meant small"


From the Official Website of the British Monarchy. So, could be either, nobody knows.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...