 fleshcanvas says: what... the... fuck. Philip Atkinson is a certifiable psycho. This guy never studied history in his life. The article makes for scary reading. However I totally disagree with all of the article. Comparing the U.S. to Rome is laughable and quite annoying. There is no comparison at all. For a start Roman politicians were also soldiers and required to lead their men into battle. They also had a sense of honour and when they rescinded their word, they payed a heavy price in blood and money. As for Caesar committing genocide and mass slaughter, that is complete nonsense. When Caesar defeated Vercingetorix in 52 BC, he spared the Gauls and used their military might to defeat Pompey in a vicious civil war. If you... That website is for paranoid nut cases. A vast amount of US law is actually built on Roman law. Even down the name of their buildings and place names. Where do you think capitol hill came from? There are plenty of resources out there to prove this point: http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&hs=UFy&q=architecture+of+washington+inspired+by+rome&btnG=Search&meta= You should read your own sources. Capitol Hill; Neoclassical architecture was an architectural style produced by the neoclassical movement that began in the mid-18th century, both as a reaction against the Rococo style of anti-tectonic naturalistic ornament, and an outgrowth of some classicizing features of Late Baroque. A bastardization of style, plagiarising Greek, Roman and Renaissance architecture. As for the law system you will find it resembles Brehon law more closely than any other law system. As for your Constitution thank the Iroquois Confederation. Copyright law. Law of Arbitration. Back to the main point the article is crass and evil. Not to mention it states majority rule. Bush does not have majority rule. I know this article is complete bullshit. I'm just in awe that someone actually thinks this way. Democracy being a failed system of government? Maybe if we actually implemented it 100% of the time without fail & still got the same results I'd be inclined to agree. But we do not. Brilliant clip though. The website scared the sh*t of me. I learned long ago not to trust a URL that was all digits. Stall the boat for a moment, both english and american law can and do trace back to roman law. roman law dates back as far as 800BC where as Brehon law only dates back as far as 600AD Why did the architects who designed the grand buildings in washington dc bastardise greek and roman architecture? To show their resemblence to Irish architecture of ring forts and crannogs? No, to clearly state that the system they were helping build has its origins in Ancient Roman and Greece. I think Amergin needs to read their sources Look up capitol hill in reference to Roman rule. http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/B6334CB3-F57F-4B41-8E99-1892239C5E79/ Roman law dates back as far as 800BC where as Brehon law only dates back as far as 600AD Interesting seeing as Rome was founded in 753BC and In the Annals of the Four Masters or Annales Rioghachta Eireann refers to a school of druids called Mur Ollamhan, the City of the Learned existed in 927BC. Some aspects of common law do resemble Roman law, but not all areas of law do. It is trendy for America to think it is like Rome at the moment, much like Victorian England did one time. Do not be sucked in by this. As for Capitol Hill it is a Neoclassical structure, not truly Roman. As for Brehon law dating back to 600AD, I believe you are refering to the Christian writings from that time. Irish is the third oldest language in Europe, the first being Greek and Second Latin. Latin itself had more to do with the Etruscans than the Romans, as do their laws. Brehon law existed long before Rome due to the Oral traditions of the Celtic peoples. |
View the Top Clips from August 17, 2007
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
