the bearded wonder
ahem. 24 years.
A US children's nanny whose boyfriend gave her the twitter handle @theashes, prompting a flurry of confusing messages by cricket-loving tweeters as a result, has made it Down Under for the final test match in Sydney. Ashley Kerekes, 22, had turned on text notification for new messages on her phone. As a result she received a …
Now if I get a twitter address a bit like @London2012, I rather think I'd be done for something rather than getting my travel and hotel paid after professing ignorance of glorified running races.
Maybe she just chose carefully and played the part long enough to get the reward. IF so, kudos.
It was always the English empire, just as in all documents it used to be referred to as England, up until the 1930's, when the Scottish National Party decided to take umbrage and change the naming conventions, forcing on us Britain and the various constituent parts of the United Kingdom being named.
There are still some tomes released regarding England and calling it as such in the traditional manner, i.e. in modern parlance the United Kingdom.
I could not let such a blatant mis-representation of history pass. A quick search of Hansard archives from 1803 to 2005 provides us with an easy quantifiable proof.
The term “British Empire” gives us 15,480 results starting with the Kings speech of 1803.
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/search/%22British%20empire%22?sort=date
A search of “English Empire” returns a mere 40 including a number of false results such as ‘English empirical tradition’.
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/search/%22english%20empire%22?sort=date
>>"It was always the English empire, just as in all documents it used to be referred to as England"
It seems that in reality, people were talking about a 'British Empire' even well before the Act of Union, which was itself seemingly prompted to some extent by the failure of a Scottish attempt to start a foreign colony.
Though no doubt, that was all England's fault as well, just like everything else that ever happened.
And presumably, unlike everyone else, the /Scots/ who participated in the slave trade were only doing so unwillingly and under great duress, and not out of any personal greed, and in fact cried every time they wheeled their profits to the bank.