Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Richard III may have been horrid and murdered the two little boys, but the Tudors who usurped him had an even more dubious claim to the throne so persisted in painting Richard as the devil incarnate (Shakespeare, I'm looking at you). There's no reason to think that he was any more or less bloodthirsty or ruthless than any other monarch at around that time.


Great piece of archaeology though...

I saw the entire Live news broadcast from Leicester University, where about six professors in their field - archeology, forensics, geneology, genes, armoury and others all delivered their own explanation of how they came to the conclusions they did. It was most moving, as they also thanked all those who had contributed their knowledge (and their DNA in the case of the relatives!) Then the head of Leicester University announced with pride that Leicester Uni was the one who had discovered DNA and now this, ie. GIVE US MORE MONEY! It was interrupted by the news of Huhne (who I hope goes to prison), then back to the news conference in Leicester.


Back to the news anchors on BBCNews24 and one said, "Well they strung that out, didn't they!"

If the change in the law of primogeniture had happened a few hundred years ago Henry Tudor's claim to the throne would have seemed less dubious. I wonder though - where will they bury Richard III? Pesumably Leicester's primary Roman Catholic Church has a very strong claim.

I am not convinced that he was as white as snow, what happen to his nephews who murdered them? if he did not physically kill them I think he knew about it.


As for his relatives who think that Richard 111 was demonised by Shakespeare may have point. But the fact remains there are unanswered question about this point in history. I also find relatives of infamous people always try to justify their relatives behaviour i.e.???.. Captain Blythe as an example.

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

    • @Sue said: nobody is blaming the child, they are blaming the person who should have been watching him g) do you really think it was acceptable for that person to find the situation funny? This is the point. Adults are meant to teach their children by example. It sounds as though the adult guardian/ father in this case did not react appropriately. Had a truly sincere apology been given,  I suspect the OP would not have posted on here. It is possible the OP snapped in the heat of the moment, but they were possibly startled because they were hit from behind? If we are startled it can be instinctive to initially react with anger. I also agree that it would be highly irresponsible to let any very young child ride or walk or do anything on a busy public street without supervision- most of all to protect the child. If in this case the child was out of the adult's line of sight that is perhaps another indication that the father needs a refresh in appropriate behaviour around a child, as well as his manners.
    • Malumbu,  if none of us were there, does that mean that nobody should post anything on here unless they have witnesses from the EDF? Why would someone post something like this if it  wasn't true? This is not about whether children should or should not be cycling on the pavement. There are specific issues. a) the child was out of sight of the person supposed to be caring for him b) he appears to have been  either not looking where he was going or was out of control of the bike c) if he did see that he was about to hit someone  he apparently did not give them any kind of warning  d)  a person was unexpectedly hit from behind whilst just walking along, which in my view makes him a victim e) does the title of the thread really matter as the issue was described in the first post?  f) nobody is blaming the child, they are blaming the person who should have been watching him g) do you really think it was acceptable for that person to find the situation funny? The OP was not complaining about the 4 year old. They were complaining about an adult's lack of supervision of a 4 year old who was not capable of riding a bike and who hit someone from behind with no warning. Also, apart from reading the OP more carefully, perhaps also choose your words more carefully. Jobless? Lunatic? Charming.
    • I have to say, I too am upset about the passing of DulwichFox. He was a real local character, who unlike me, managed to stick with ED despite all of the nauseous yuppification of the last three decades. R.I.P to foxy    Louisa. 
    • How long is a piece of string? AI was a bit rubbish on this one, but Checatrade : average cost to paint a house exterior is around £30 per square metre So depends on the size, access, time to put up scaffolding and cost of hiring and building that, surface preparation, and quality of materials.   Checkatrade put it at £2.5 k for average semi, that sounds a little cheap.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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