Podcasts about english parliament

This Day in Legal History: Petition of RightOn May 8, 1628, the English Parliament formally presented the Petition of Right to King Charles I, marking a key moment in the development of constitutional law and the rule of law in England. This pivotal document emerged in response to growing discontent over the king's use of extrajudicial practices—most notably, the levying of taxes without Parliament's approval and the imprisonment of individuals without cause. Parliament asserted that such actions violated established legal norms rooted in Magna Carta and the common law. The Petition of Right articulated four principal grievances: non-Parliamentary taxation, arbitrary imprisonment, the quartering of soldiers in private homes, and the imposition of martial law during peacetime.Rather than draft new laws, Parliament framed the Petition as a reaffirmation of ancient liberties, underscoring that even the monarch was not above the law. Although Charles initially resisted, political pressure forced him to accept the Petition—though he would later undermine its principles, contributing to the constitutional crises that led to the English Civil War. The Petition became a foundational text in the Anglo-American legal tradition, influencing later legal milestones such as the English Bill of Rights (1689) and the United States Constitution.Its insistence on due process, the separation of powers, and limits on executive authority laid early groundwork for modern democratic governance. In rejecting the idea that the king could rule by prerogative alone, the Petition of Right helped to establish Parliament's role as a co-equal branch of government. The document continues to be cited in legal and political discourse as a seminal assertion of civil liberties. It was a bold challenge to monarchical absolutism at a time when questioning royal authority was fraught with danger. Through its articulation of legal limits on state power, the Petition of Right remains a cornerstone in the long evolution of constitutional democracy.Jenner & Block continues to take on high-profile legal battles against the Trump administration while awaiting a ruling in its own lawsuit challenging one of Trump's executive orders. The firm recently filed a suit in Massachusetts federal court on behalf of universities challenging cost caps imposed by the National Science Foundation on federally funded research. This is one of several legal actions Jenner has brought since Trump's return to the presidency, including lawsuits over restrictions on gender-affirming care and funding cuts to scientific research.Jenner is also seeking to permanently block a Trump executive order that targets the firm due to its ties to Andrew Weissmann, a former partner involved in the Mueller investigation. A judge has already temporarily blocked parts of the order, and other firms like Perkins Coie have secured similar rulings. Critics worry these orders could deter law firms from opposing the administration for fear of retaliation.Jenner is collaborating with former Solicitor General Paul Clement and his firm Clement & Murphy in its newest lawsuit on behalf of major research universities. They've previously teamed up to challenge medical research funding cuts, winning a preliminary court victory. Clement is also representing WilmerHale in its legal fight against Trump. The core argument in these cases is that the administration's actions infringe on constitutional rights, including free speech, due process, and equal protection.Jenner Adds Trump Fights While Fending Off Executive Order (1)The EPA under the second Trump administration is making Superfund site cleanups a central priority, aiming to accelerate remediation efforts across over 1,300 contaminated locations nationwide. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin emphasized a push for expedited timelines and tangible outcomes, positioning Superfund cleanups as visible and community-focused work that garners public support. The administration has highlighted early actions like major soil removals, enforcement efforts that secured nearly $300 million in cleanups, and the removal of four sites from the Superfund National Priorities List.Observers say this mirrors the Trump EPA's first term, which also emphasized efficiency and redevelopment of polluted sites, often encouraging private investment. However, budget constraints remain a challenge. Superfund appropriations have dropped significantly since 1999, and while the 2021 Infrastructure Act provided a temporary funding boost and reinstated taxes on chemical companies, the current administration's 2026 budget proposes a $254 million cut, claiming tax revenue will suffice.Industry groups oppose the chemical tax, while environmental experts warn that funding and staffing shortfalls could stall progress. Critics caution that setting aggressive timelines without sufficient resources could backfire, leading to missed goals and wasted efforts. To improve the program, experts suggest reforms such as more collaboration with local entities and clearer guidance on common cleanup approaches to reduce delays.Trumps' EPA Shifts to Make Superfund Cleanups a Central MissionFormer Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has retired from the law firm Paul Weiss to take on a leadership role at Columbia University, where he was elected co-chair of the board of trustees. Johnson, who served under President Obama and spent four decades at Paul Weiss, said he will miss his colleagues but is ready for the new challenge. His departure comes amid tensions between both Paul Weiss and Columbia with the Trump administration.Earlier this year, Trump issued an executive order limiting Paul Weiss's access to federal agencies, citing its ties to a prosecutor from the Russia investigation. To resolve the issue, the firm agreed to provide $40 million in pro bono legal services aligned with the administration's goals—a move criticized by some legal professionals for not challenging the order in court. Paul Weiss's chairman defended the agreement as necessary to protect the firm's future.Columbia University has also faced pressure from the Trump administration, which cut $400 million in federal funding over allegations that the school failed to address antisemitism on campus. In response, Columbia has made concessions to regain funding and recently laid off nearly 180 researchers due to financial strain. The university continues to operate without a permanent president following protests over the Israel-Gaza conflict.Johnson, a known critic of Trump's immigration policies and supporter of Kamala Harris in 2024, becomes the second high-profile departure from Paul Weiss following the firm's controversial deal with the administration.Ex-Obama cabinet secretary leaves law firm Paul Weiss for Columbia post | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

I give an update on the progress of the podcast, and an important caution on how to sign up as a patron while avoiding Apple's new fees. I give an excerpt from my latest episode for patrons, "History of the United States in 100 Objects -- 24: Beaver-Fur Stovepipe Hat, ca. 1590-1670" -- On this episode: A tall “stovepipe” hat, which was made in the 1600s out of felt from beaver fur and likely belonged to a powerful member of the English Parliament, illustrates the extraordinary value of finely made hats, which fueled centuries of colonization, exploration, diplomatic feuding, and warfare all across North America, as European empires and Native American nations competed fiercely for control of the lucrative fur trade. Please sign up here (on desktop or Android app -- not iPhone!) in order to hear the whole lecture: https://www.patreon.com/posts/history-of-in-24-126376005

For a limited time, upgrade to ‘The Storm's' paid tier for $5 per month or $55 per year. You'll also receive a free year of Slopes Premium, a $29.99 value - valid for annual subscriptions only. Monthly subscriptions do not qualify for free Slopes promotion. Valid for new subscriptions only.WhoStuart Winchester, Founder, Editor & Host of The Storm Skiing Journal & PodcastRecorded onMarch 4, 2025Editor's note1) The headline was not my idea; 2) Erik said he would join me as the guest for episode 199 if he could interview me for episode 200; 3) I was like “sure Brah”; 4) since he did the interview, I asked Erik to write the “Why I interviewed him” section; 5) this episode is now available to stream on Disney+; 6) but no really you can watch it on YouTube (please subscribe); 7) if you don't care about this episode that's OK because there are 199 other ones that are actually about snosportskiing; 8) and I have a whole bunch more recorded that I'll drop right after this one; 9) except that one that I terminally screwed up; 10) “which one?” you ask. Well I'll tell that humiliating story when I'm ready.Why I interviewed him, by Erik MogensenI met Stuart when he was skiing at Copper Mountain with his family. At lunch that day I made a deal. I would agree to do the first podcast of my career, but only if I had the opportunity reverse the role and interview him. I thought both my interview, and his, would be at least five years away. 14 months later, you are reading this.As an accomplished big-city corporate PR guy often [occasionally] dressed in a suit, he got tired of listening to the biggest, tallest, snowiest, ski content that was always spoon-fed to his New York City self. Looking for more than just “Stoke,” Stu has built the Storm Skiing Journal into a force that I believe has assumed an important stewardship role for skiing. Along the way he has occasionally made us cringe, and has always made us laugh.Many people besides myself apparently agree. Stuart has eloquently mixed an industry full of big, type-A egos competing for screentime on the next episode of Game of Thrones, with consumers that have been overrun with printed magazines that show up in the mail, or social media click-bate, but nothing in between. He did it by being as authentic and independent as they come, thus building trust with everyone from the most novice ski consumer to nearly all of the expert operators and owners on the continent.But don't get distracted by the “Winchester Style” of poking fun of ski bro and his group of bro brahs like someone took over your mom's basement with your used laptop, and a new nine-dollar website. Once you get over the endless scrolling required to get beyond the colorful spreadsheets, this thing is fun AND worthwhile to read and listen to. This guy went to Columbia for journalism and it shows. This guy cares deeply about what he does, and it shows.Stuart has brought something to ski journalism that we didn't even know was missing, Not only did Stuart find out what it was, he created and scaled a solution. On his 200th podcast I dig into why and how he did it.What we talked aboutHow Erik talked me into being a guest on my own podcast; the history of The Storm Skiing Podcast and why I launched with Northeast coverage; why the podcast almost didn't happen; why Killington was The Storm's first pod; I didn't want to go to college but it happened anyway; why I moved to New York; why a ski writer lives in Brooklyn; “I started The Storm because I wanted to read it”; why I have no interest in off-resort skiing; why pay-to-play isn't journalism; the good and the awful about social media; I hate debt; working at the NBA; the tech innovation that allowed me to start The Storm; activating The Storm's paywall; puzzling through subscriber retention; critical journalism as an alien concept to the ski industry; Bro beef explained; what's behind skiing's identity crisis; why I don't read my social media comments; why I couldn't get ski area operators to do podcasts online in 2019; how the digital world has reframed how we think about skiing; why I don't write about weather; what I like about ski areas; ski areas as art; why the Pass Tracker 5001 looks like a piece of crap and probably always will; “skiing is fun, reading about it should be too”; literary inspirations for The Storm; being critical without being a tool; and why readers should trust me.Podcast notesOn The New England Lost Ski Areas ProjectThe New England Lost Ski Areas Project is still very retro looking. Storm Skiing Podcast episode number three, with site founder Jeremy Davis, is still one of my favorites:On my sled evac at Black Mountain of MaineYeah I talk about this all the time but in case you missed the previous five dozen reminders:On my timelineMy life, in brief (we reference all of these things on the pod):* 1992 – Try skiing on a school bus trip to now-defunct Mott Mountain, Michigan; suck at it* 1993 – Try skiing again, at Snow Snake, Michigan; don't suck as much* 1993 - Invent Doritos* 1994 – Receive first pair of skis for Christmas* 1995 – Graduate high school* 1995 - Become first human to live on Saturn for one month without the aid of oxygen* 1995-98 – Attend Delta College* 1997 - Set MLB homerun record, with 82 regular-season bombs, while winning Cy Young Award with .04 ERA and 743 batters struck out* 1998-00 – Attend University of Michigan* 1998-2007 - Work various restaurant server jobs in Michigan and NYC* 2002 – Move to Manhattan* 2003 - Invent new phone/computer hybrid with touchscreen; changes modern life instantly* 2003-07 – Work as English teacher at Cascade High School on Manhattan's Lower East Side* 2003-05 – Participate in New York City Teaching Fellows program via Pace University* 2004 - Successfully clone frozen alien cells that fell to Earth via meteorite; grows into creature that levels San Antonio with fire breath* 2006-08 – Columbia Journalism School* 2007-12 – Work at NBA league office* 2008 – Daughter is born* 2010 - Complete the 10-10-10 challenge, mastering 10 forms of martial arts and 10 non-human languages in 2010* 2013 – Work at AIG* 2014-2024 – Work at Viacom/Paramount* 2015 - Formally apologize to the people of Great Britain for my indecencies at the Longminster Day Victory Parade in 1947* 2016 – Son is born; move to Brooklyn* 2019 – Launch The Storm* 2022 – Take The Storm paid* 2023 - Discover hidden sea-floor city populated by talking alligators * 2024 – The Storm becomes my full-time job* 2025 - Take Storm sabbatical to qualify for the 50-meter hurdles at the 2028 Summer OlympicsOn LeBron's “Decision”After spending his first several seasons playing for the Cleveland Cavaliers, LeBron announced his 2010 departure for the Miami Heat in his notorious The Decision special.On MGoBlog and other influencesI've written about MGoBlog's influence on The Storm in the past:The University of Michigan's official athletic site is mgoblue.com. Thus, MGoBlog – get it? Clever, right? The site is, actually, brilliant. For Michigan sports fans, it's a cultural touchstone and reference point, comprehensive and hilarious. Everyone reads it. Everyone. It's like it's 1952 and everyone in town reads the same newspaper, only the paper is always and only about Michigan sports and the town is approximately three million ballsports fans spread across the planet. We don't all read it because we're all addicted to sports. We all read MGoBlog because the site is incredibly fun, with its own culture, vocabulary, and inside jokes born of the shared frustrations and particulars of Michigan (mostly football, basketball, and hockey) fandom.Brian Cook is the site's founder and best writer (I also recommend BiSB, who writes the hysterical Opponent Watch series). Here is a recent and random sample – sportsballtalk made engaging:It was 10-10 and it was stupid. Like half the games against Indiana, it was stupid and dumb. At some point I saw a highlight from that Denard game against Indiana where IU would score on a 15-play march and then Denard would immediately run for a 70 yard touchdown. "God, that game was stupid," I thought. Flinging the ball in the general direction of Junior Hemingway and hoping something good would happen, sort of thing. Charting 120 defensive plays, sort of thing. Craig Roh playing linebacker, sort of thing.Don't get me started about #chaosteam, or overtimes, or anything else. My IQ is already dropping precipitously. Any more exposure to Michigan-Indiana may render me unable to finish this column. (I would still be able to claim that MSU was defeated with dignity, if that was my purpose in life.)I had hoped that a little JJ McCarthy-led mediation in the locker room would straighten things out. Michigan did suffer through a scary event when Mike Hart collapsed on the sideline. This is a completely valid reason you may not be executing football with military precision, even setting aside whatever dorfy bioweapon the Hoosiers perfected about ten years ago.Those hopes seemed dashed when Michigan was inexplicably offsides on a short-yardage punt on which they didn't even bother to rush. A touchback turned into a punt downed at the two, and then Blake Corum committed a false start and Cornelius Johnson dropped something that was either a chunk play or a 96-yard touchdown. Johnson started hopping up and down near the sideline, veritably slobbering with self-rage. The slope downwards to black pits became very slippery.JJ McCarthy said "namaste."Cook is consistent. I knew I could simply grab the first thing from his latest post and it would be excellent, and it was. Even if you know nothing about football, you know that's strong writing.In The Storm's early days, I would often describe my ambitions – to those familiar with both sites – as wanting “to create MGoBlog for Northeast skiing.” What I meant was that I wanted something that would be consistent, engaging, and distinct from competing platforms. Skiing has enough stoke machines and press-release reprint factories. It needed something different. MGoBlog showed me what that something could be.On being critical without being a toolThis is the Burke example Erik was referring to:The town of Burke, named for Sir Edmund Burke of the English Parliament, was chartered in 1782. That was approximately the same year that court-appointed receiver Michael Goldberg began seeking a buyer for Burke Mountain, after an idiot named Ariel Quiros nearly sent the ski area (along with Jay Peak) to the graveyard in an $80 million EB-5 visa scandal.Now, several industrial revolutions and world wars later, Goldberg says he may finally have a buyer for the ski area. But he said the same thing in 2024. And in 2023. And also, famously, in 1812, though the news was all but lost amid that year's war headlines.Whether or not Burke ever finds a permanent owner (Goldberg has actually been in charge since 2016), nothing will change the fact that this is one hell of a ski area. While it's not as snowy as its neighbors stacked along the Green Mountain Spine to its west, Burke gets its share of the white and fluffy. And while the mountain is best-known as the home of racing institution Burke Mountain Academy, the everyskier's draw here is the endless, tangled, spectacular glade network, lappable off of the 1,581-vertical-foot Mid-Burke Express Quad.Corrections* I worked for a long time in corporate communications, HR, and marketing, but not ever exactly in “PR,” as Erik framed it. But I also didn't really describe it to him very well because I don't really care and I'm just glad it's all over.* I made a vague reference to the NBA pulling its All-Star game out of Atlanta. I was thinking of the league's 2016 decision to move the 2017 All-Star game out of Charlotte over the state's “bathroom bill.” This is not a political take I'm just explaining what I was thinking about.* I said that Jiminy Peak's season pass cost $1,200. The current early-bird price for a 2025-26 pass is $1,051 for an adult unlimited season pass. The pass is scheduled to hit $1,410 after Oct. 15.The Storm explores the world of lift-served skiing year-round. Join us. Get full access to The Storm Skiing Journal and Podcast at www.stormskiing.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Charles I Placed on TrialOn January 6, 1649, the English Parliament took a momentous step by voting to place King Charles I on trial for high treason. This decision came in the wake of the English Civil War, a prolonged conflict between Royalists, loyal to the king, and Parliamentarians seeking to limit monarchical power. Leading up to the trial, the New Model Army, under Oliver Cromwell, orchestrated "Pride's Purge," expelling Members of Parliament likely to oppose the trial. The remaining assembly, known as the Rump Parliament, convened and authorized the creation of the High Court of Justice, an unprecedented legal body tasked with trying a sitting monarch.The trial marked a dramatic shift in the balance of power, challenging the divine right of kings—a cornerstone of monarchical rule. Charles I was accused of subverting the laws of England and waging war against his own people, charges that he denied, arguing that no court held legitimate authority to judge a king. Despite his defense, the court convicted Charles on January 27, 1649, sentencing him to death. His execution on January 30 sent shockwaves throughout Europe, signaling the emergence of parliamentary sovereignty and temporarily abolishing the monarchy in favor of the Commonwealth under Cromwell.This legal milestone not only altered the trajectory of English governance but also set a precedent for holding leaders accountable to the rule of law. The Supreme Court is expected to play a critical role in assessing the legality of anticipated Trump administration policies, particularly in immigration and administrative law. Immigration policies, such as ending birthright citizenship and mass deportations, are likely to be challenged in court, with outcomes depending on their framing, especially if tied to national security concerns, which the Court tends to view more favorably than economic justifications. The Court's recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which limited agency power by ending Chevron deference, may have far-reaching implications for both the Biden and Trump administrations. While reducing agencies' regulatory authority aligns with Trump's deregulatory goals, it also empowers blue states and civil rights groups to challenge his policies under stricter judicial scrutiny.Challenges to agency head tenure protections and interpretations of outdated laws could also come before the Court. Trump's potential push to dismantle longstanding precedents like Humphrey's Executor v. United States could make federal agencies more directly accountable to the presidency, further politicizing their functions. Critics note that these shifts in judicial doctrine cut both ways, curbing regulatory power broadly regardless of the administration in power. This duality underscores a tension between conservative goals of limiting administrative overreach and the desire to expedite executive policy-making.Trump Likely to Test Supreme Court on Agency Powers, ImmigrationPresident Joe Biden has permanently barred offshore oil and gas drilling across over 625 million acres of US coastal waters, including the East and West Coasts, parts of the Gulf of Mexico, and sections of the Northern Bering Sea. Citing environmental risks and minimal energy gains, Biden stated the move balances conservation and energy security, ensuring that protecting coastlines and maintaining low energy prices are not mutually exclusive. The decision does not affect existing offshore leases or ongoing drilling in Alaska's Cook Inlet and the central and western Gulf of Mexico, which account for a significant portion of US energy production.Biden's action builds on temporary protections enacted by former President Trump for Florida's Gulf Coast and southeastern waters but makes them indefinite. While praised by environmental advocates and coastal communities, the oil industry criticized the move, arguing that it restricts domestic energy potential and undermines national security. Some politicians from both parties have supported these protections, emphasizing the risks demonstrated by disasters like the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill.Although Biden's decision relies on a federal law provision that may be difficult to reverse, legal challenges could arise if a future administration attempts to undo the protections. The debate underscores tensions between environmental stewardship and energy independence.Biden Bars Offshore Oil Drilling in US Atlantic and PacificBiden to ban offshore oil, gas drilling in vast areas ahead of Trump term | ReutersThe U.S. Department of Justice has urged the Supreme Court to deny President-elect Donald Trump's request to delay a law requiring TikTok's Chinese owner, ByteDance, to sell its U.S. assets by January 19 or face a nationwide ban. Trump argued for more time after his inauguration to seek a political resolution, while the DOJ countered that ByteDance has not demonstrated it is likely to succeed on the merits of its case. The government emphasized the national security risks of TikTok's data collection on 170 million American users, framing it as a tool for potential espionage.TikTok, however, has requested the Court block the law on First Amendment grounds, claiming it is being unfairly targeted for its content rather than its data practices, especially given Congress's lack of action against other Chinese-owned apps like Shein and Temu. If the law takes effect, new downloads of TikTok will be prohibited, and existing services will degrade over time as companies are barred from providing support. The Biden administration could extend the compliance deadline by 90 days if ByteDance shows significant progress toward divestment. This marks a shift in Trump's stance from 2020, when he sought to ban TikTok over similar concerns. The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on January 10.Justice Dept. urges Supreme Court to reject Trump request to delay TikTok ban law | ReutersDisney, Fox, and Warner Bros Discovery are appealing a court ruling that blocked the launch of their joint streaming service, Venu Sports, arguing it unfairly restricts competition and consumer choice. The district court previously halted Venu's debut after rival FuboTV sued, claiming the service violated antitrust laws by bundling sports content in a way that would harm competition and raise prices. The district court sided with Fubo, finding that the bundling practices could foreclose other sports-focused services and granted an injunction against Venu's launch.The media companies argue that the ruling denies consumers a lower-cost streaming option aimed at price-sensitive sports fans and protects Fubo from competition. They assert that Venu would increase consumer choice and lower prices. However, the Justice Department and several states have supported the injunction, stating that Venu's creation would consolidate market power among the companies—who control over half of U.S. sports rights—and hinder the emergence of competing sports-only platforms like Fubo.At the heart of the dispute is whether the bundling practices by Disney, Fox, and Warner Bros unfairly disadvantage distributors by tying access to desirable sports content with less popular programming. The appeals court will now decide if the injunction stands.Disney, Fox and Warner Bros to ask court to lift ban on launch of Venu Sports service | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Subscribe to support me & access bonus content: patreon.com/englishwitholiver My Easy English Videos on Youtube! Link: https://www.youtube.com/@UnderstandableEnglishPod Why do people across the UK celebrate Bonfire Night on November 5th? In this episode of the Easy English Podcast, we explore the history of Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder Plot, a fascinating story from 1605 when a group planned to blow up the English Parliament. Learn how this event is remembered each year with fireworks and bonfires, and discover the significance of this tradition. Perfect for English learners curious about UK culture and history!

The Stuart dynasty did NOT have a good relationship with the English Parliament. That begins with King James I. WebsitePatreon Support

Welcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you'll hear the Court's opinion in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v Community Financial Services Assn. of America, Ltd.       In this case, the court considered this issue: Does the funding scheme for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which receives funding directly from the Federal Reserve, violate the Appropriations Clause of the Constitution? The case was decided on May 16, 2024. The Supreme Court held that the funding scheme for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau satisfies the Appropriations Clause. Justice Clarence Thomas authored the 7-2 majority opinion of the Court. The Appropriations Clause provides that “no Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” Article I, §9, cl. 7—in other words, government spending must be authorized by an act of Congress. Historically, the word “appropriation” requires identifying a source of public funds and authorizing the expenditure of those funds for designated purposes. The practices of the English Parliament after the Glorious Revolution, the American Colonies, early state legislatures, and the First Congress varied widely in their specificity, duration, and structure, but all met these basic requirements. The statute authorizing the CFPB's funding likewise contains the necessary elements of a valid appropriation under the Appropriations Clause. It identifies a source of funds (the combined earnings of the Federal Reserve System), sets a maximum amount that can be drawn, and specifies the purpose for which the funds can be used (to pay the CFPB's expenses in carrying out its duties). Furthermore, the CFPB's funding mechanism is analogous to some of the broad, open-ended appropriations passed by the First Congress. Therefore, the CFPB's funding statute satisfies the requirements of the Appropriations Clause. Justice Elena Kagan authored a concurring opinion, in which Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett joined, noting that CFPB's funding scheme would have been acceptable not only in the late-18th century, but also any other time in our Nation's history. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson authored a concurring opinion, endorsing judicial restraint. She pointed out that “when the Constitution's text does not provide a limit to a coordinate branch's power,” courts “should not lightly assume that Article III implicitly directs the Judiciary to find one.” Justice Samuel Alito authored a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Neil Gorsuch joined, arguing that the Appropriations Clause imposes more stringent obligations on Congress to monitor and control the expenditure of public funds and the projects they finance. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scotus-opinions/support

Guy Fawkes et al decide to blow up King James I and the English Parliament. Spoiler alert: it doesn't work...WebsiteWestern Civ 2.0 Free Trial

The memorable and noticeable events in First Turnings particularly include * Infrastruture * Exploration * Seeking out corruption, in whatever form it's expected to exist. Rebuilding St. Peter's Basilica falls under the first category, especially when it's being rebuilt for the first time in over 1000 years.     Americans learn of the founding of Jamestown as part of their country's history, as the first successful English colony in the New World and the precursor to the Thirteen Colonies that would eventually rebel against the British. It can also be looked at as the start of the British Empire, and as embodying a spirit of exploration in the aftermath of the victory over Spain.  All of which make it an appropriate instance of a First Turning landmark.    In 1714, the British Parliament approved The Longitude Prize, which offered monetary rewards to anyone who could make it possible for ships to effectively determine their longitude. The smallest prize was £10,000 - the equivalent of millions of dollars today.    The Kingdom of Great Britain was created by The Acts of Union  in 1707. Before then, one would properly refer to the English Parliament, and after to the British Parliament. This epsode crosses over that point in time between the start and the end, so the incorrect adjective may have slipped in once or twice.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Union_1707   The Global Positioning System (GPS) might be considered a comparable sort of infrastructure, but it was created over a long enough period that associating it with a specific Turning is difficult. It also required infrastructure (namely rockets that could put satellites in orbit), and was implemented in short order once those were available. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System       In 1804, Lewis and Clark's "Corps of Discovery" heads north and west from where the Missouri and Mississippi rivers meet, attempting to find a way to the Pacific Ocean. The First Turning encourages Exploration, which continues to use the governmental infrastructure set up during the previous Fourth Turning, but avoids the complications of a open warfare....   Expanding infrastructure is one of the key indicators of the First Turning, and the transcontinental railroad was an infrastructure priority for the United States in the 19th Century.     The organizational strengths and focus that enable infrastructure and exploration are not always aimed at such noble pursuits. Sometimes they find internal enemies, or at least try to seek them out. The fear of Communists infilitrating the entertainment industry led the U.S. Government to pursue a group that became known as The Hollywood Ten. As this hits the edge of the map for the First Turning, we continue on with a short description of our final historical period, the Third Turning, and how we'll be choosing our landmarks there.

I dag snakker Per og Henrik om den engelske statsmannen og kongemorderen Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658). Han er kjent for å ha oppløst det engelske parlamentet på 1620-tallet, samt at han fikk både kong Charles I og II med få års mellomrom. I tillegg til dette får du vite hvorfor navnet hans er synonymt med å ønske folk døde i Irland. Det er også duket for NRK-hjørnet. God lytting! ------------ Today, Per and Henrik discuss the English statesman and royal assassin Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658). He is known for dissolving the English Parliament in the 1620s, and for having both King Charles I and II within a few years of each other. In addition to this, you'll find out why his name is synonymous with wishing people dead in Ireland. There's also the NRK corner. Happy listening!    

Check out The Jack & 'Chill Podcast here!http://atozenglishpodcast.com/episodeshttps://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-jack-chill-podcast/id1709902691https://redcircle.com/shows/the-jack-and-chill-podcastHere are some significant historical events that happened on November 3rd throughout world history:1493 - Christopher Columbus first spotted the island of Dominica during his second voyage to the Americas.1534 - English Parliament passed the Act of Supremacy, making King Henry VIII the head of the Church of England.1903 - With the help of the Wright brothers, Samuel P. Langley's Aerodrome, an early attempt at powered flight, crashed into the Potomac River in the United States.1957 - The Soviet Union launched Sputnik 2, carrying the first living creature, a dog named Laika, into space.1964 - Lyndon B. Johnson was elected as the 36th President of the United States in a landslide victory over Barry Goldwater.1979 - A group of Iranian militants stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, taking 52 American hostages. The Iran Hostage Crisis would last for 444 days.1986 - The Lebanese magazine "Ash-Shiraa" revealed the existence of secret arms sales to Iran, leading to the Iran-Contra scandal during the Reagan administration.1992 - Democrat Bill Clinton was elected as the 42nd President of the United States, defeating incumbent President George H.W. Bush.2014 - One World Trade Center, the main building of the rebuilt World Trade Center complex in New York City, officially opened to the public.2016 - The Paris Agreement on climate change, which aims to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, entered into force.These are just a few historical events that have occurred on November 3rd. There are many more, covering a wide range of topics and time periods.Podcast Website:https://atozenglishpodcast.com/a-to-z-this-day-in-world-history-november-3rd/Social Media:Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/671098974684413/Tik Tok:@atozenglish1Instagram:@atozenglish22Twitter:@atozenglish22A to Z Facebook Page:https://www.facebook.com/theatozenglishpodcastCheck out our You Tube Channel:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCds7JR-5dbarBfas4Ve4h8ADonate to the show: https://app.redcircle.com/shows/9472af5c-8580-45e1-b0dd-ff211db08a90/donationsRobin and Jack started a new You Tube channel called English Word Master. You can check it out here:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2aXaXaMY4P2VhVaEre5w7ABecome a member of Podchaser and leave a positive review!https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/the-a-to-z-english-podcast-4779670Join our Whatsapp group: https://forms.gle/zKCS8y1t9jwv2KTn7Intro/Outro Music: Daybird by Broke for Freehttps://freemusicarchive.org/music/Broke_For_Free/Directionless_EP/Broke_For_Free_-_Directionless_EP_-_03_Day_Bird/https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcodehttps://freemusicarchive.org/music/eaters/simian-samba/audrey-horne/https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Scott_Joplin/Piano_Rolls_from_archiveorg/ScottJoplin-RagtimeDance1906/https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/the-a-to-z-english-podcast/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Editors' Picks:Rich: MBD's piece “Prepared for the Fall?”Charlie: Noah's piece "What's Behind Biden's Pivot to Maui"MBD: Wilfred Reilly's piece “The Maui-Disaster Narrative Is All Wrong”Phil: Jim's Ukraine coverage the last two weeksLight Items:Rich: The Origins of the English Parliament by John MaddicottCharlie: The  college football seasonMBD: GolfPhil: 1970s thriller moviesSponsors:WaterStoneCEI's podcast How the World WorksThis podcast was edited and produced by Sarah Colleen Schutte.

Charles I has been executed, and the English Parliament establish a new, kingless, government. The reaction to the Regicide sweeps across Europe and the fledgling English empire. For this episode, I found the following publications particularly useful: Philip Baker, 'The Regicide', in Michael J. Braddick. The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution Kenyon, J. and Ohlmeyer, J., The Civil Wars: A Military History of England, Scotland, and Ireland, 1638-1660. Harris, T. Rebellion Geoffrey Robertson, The Tyrannicide Brief: The Story of the Man who sent Charles I to the Scaffold. Healey, J. The Blazing World. MacInnes, A., The British Revolution, 1629-60. Charles Spencer, Killers of the King. Michael J. Braddick, 'War and Politics in England and Wales, 1642-1646', in Michael Braddick. The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution Michael J. Braddick, God's Fury, England's Fire Peter Gaunt, The English Civil War: A Military History Blair Worden, The English Civil Wars: 1640-1660 Ian Gentles, The English Revolution and the Wars in the Three Kingdoms, 1638-1652. Antonia Fraser, Cromwell: Our Chief of Men Kishlansky, M, Monarchy Transformed Alexia Grosjean, Steve Murdoch, Alexander Leslie and the Scottish generals of the Thirty Years' War, 1618-1648 Steve Murdoch (ed), Scotland and the Thirty Years' War Stuart Reid, Crown, Covenant, and Cromwell: The Civil Wars in Scotland, 1639-1651. Nick Lipscombe, The English Civil War: An Atlas and Concise History of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms, 1639-51 John Cunningham, ‘Politics, 1641-1660', Cambridge History of Ireland David Edwards, ‘Political Change and Social Transformation, 1603-1641', Cambridge History of Ireland John Jeremiah Cronin and Padraig Lenihan, ‘Wars of Religion, 1641-1691', Cambridge History of Ireland Patrick Little, Lord Broghill and the Cromwellian Union with Ireland and Scotland, 2004 Ó Siochrú, Micheál, (ed.) Kingdoms in Crisis: Ireland in the 1640s, 2000 Ó Siochrú, Micheál, Confederate Ireland, 1642-1649, 1999 Lenihan, Pádraig, Confederate Catholics at War, 1641-49, 2001 This podcast is part of the Airwave Media podcast network. Contact advertising@airwavemedia.com to inquire about advertising on this podcast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

News with Shelley 2-8-2023 …U.S. Capital or English Parliament?

It is difficult to hear the stories of medieval women, but one voice rings down the ages, clear as a bell. Alison, the Wife of Bath, is Geoffrey Chaucer's most famous creation: irrepressible, hilarious, insightful. She is the star of The Canterbury Tales with her outrageous stories and touching honesty. An inspiration for a huge range of writers – from William Shakespeare to Margaret Atwood and Zadie Smith – she is the sparkling subject at the heart of Marion Turner's new book, The Wife of Bath: A Biography. In this episode Turner takes us back to 1397. We visit Chaucer's world in London and Oxfordshire. We hear the extraordinary story of John of Gaunt and his beloved mistress Katherine Swynford. Along the way we meet some real-life Alisons. These were women who ran businesses, travelled extensively, and lived independently, including one who was mayoress of London, not once, but twice. Marion Turner is the J.R.R. Tolkien Professor of English Literature and Language at the University of Oxford, where she is a Professorial Fellow of Lady Margaret Hall. Her books include the prize-winning biography Chaucer: A European Life. For more, as ever, visit our website: tttpodcast.com. Show notes Scene One: January 1397. The English Parliament and the legitimatisation of John of Gaunt's children with Katherine Swynford. Scene Two: End of 1397. Chaucer has been gifted a new grant of a yearly ton of wine from the King. Scene Three: Summer. Margaret Stodeye heads off to St Paul's Cathedral to declare a vow of chastity. Memento: Chaucer's handwritten draft of the Canterbury Tales. People/Social Presenter: Violet Moller Guest: Marion Turner Production: Maria Nolan Podcast partner: Ace Cultural Tours Theme music: ‘Love Token' from the album ‘This Is Us' By Slava and Leonard Grigoryan Follow us on Twitter: @tttpodcast_ Or on Facebook See where 1397 fits on our Timeline  

Denzil Holles, now the leading Presbyterian in the English Parliament, has a cunning plan for dealing with Charles I. But he needs the New Model Army to just go away. But the army has other ideas. Fill out the survey HERE Check out the podcast website Check out Pax Britannica Merch! Facebook | Twitter | Patreon | Donate For this episode, I found the following publications particularly useful: Kaplan, Lawrence, 'Charles I's Flight to the Scots', Albion: A Quarterly Journal Concerned with British Studies Kenyon, J. and Ohlmeyer, J., The Civil Wars: A Military History of England, Scotland, and Ireland, 1638-1660. Harris, T. Rebellion Michael J. Braddick. The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution Michael J. Braddick, 'War and Politics in England and Wales, 1642-1646', in Michael Braddick. The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution Michael J. Braddick, God's Fury, England's Fire Peter Gaunt, The English Civil War: A Military History Blair Worden, The English Civil Wars: 1640-1660 Ian Gentles, The English Revolution and the Wars in the Three Kingdoms, 1638-1652 Antonia Fraser, Cromwell: Our Chief of Men Kishlansky, M, Monarchy Transformed Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Parliament of England passed the First Act of Supremacy which made Henry VIII the head of the Church of ...

In 1714, the British Parliament approved The Longitude Prize, which offered monetary rewards to anyone who could make it possible for ships to effectively determine their longitude. The smallest prize was £10,000 - the equivalent of millions of dollars today.    The Kingdom of Great Britain was created by The Acts of Union  in 1707. Before then, one would properly refer to the English Parliament, and after to the British Parliament. This epsode crosses over that point in time between the start and the end, so the incorrect adjective may have slipped in once or twice.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Union_1707   The Global Positioning System (GPS) might be considered a comparable sort of infrastructure, but it was created over a long enough period that associating it with a specific Turning is difficult. It also required infrastructure (namely rockets that could put satellites in orbit), and was implemented in short order once those were available. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System  

Hey Friends, here is our "This Week in Church History" podcast that reviews the Great Ejection of 1662 where more than 1000 ministers voluntarily preached a farewell sermon and surrendered their pulpits rather than comply with the English Parliament's Declaration for the Uniformity of Prayers, Sacraments and Ceremonies of 1662.  This would give rise to the birth of the English Dissidents that would results in a number of groups such as Anabaptist, Pilgrims, Puritans, Presbyterians, Congregationalist and other reformations eventually migrating to America and forming colonies and later the United States.

Welcome to episode 99 [originally broadcast on Thursday 21 June 2022] of #mhTV​​​​​​​​. This week Nicky Lambert and David Munday spoke with guest Dr Tirion Havard about 'The Panopticon Effect: Understanding the impact of technology on coercive control'. TH - I am an Associate Professor in the Social Work department and research focuses on Violence Against Women and Girls, specifically coercive control, technological abuse child criminal exploitation and the intersection between these three. I was once a probation officer and worked with perpetrators of domestic abuse and gang members. I now use this knowledge to inform my research with women survivors of abuse. I appeared on the BBC documentary ‘Hidden Girls'. I was recently the Principal Investigator for a Home Office funded feasibility project investigating the suitability of Artificial Intelligence to identify perpetrators of coercive control through text messages and other data held on mobile phones. I am currently evaluating a Serious Youth Violence Intervention and Prevention project at Kent County Council and the use of Independent Domestic Violence Advocates (IDVA) in Surrey hospitals. I recently secured funding from the Nuffield Foundation/British Academy to use Arts based Transformative Justice approaches to re-integrate women with convictions into their local communities. I have had the pleasure of working alongside The Mayor's Office London (MOPAC) assisting them with their VAWG strategy and with English Parliament advising them on coercive control tech abuse and how it relates to domestic abuse and criminal exploitation of women and girls. Some links to follow: Transformative Justice Women With Convictions And Uniting Communities: https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/project/transformative-justice-women-with-convictions-and-uniting-communities Street Gangs and Coercive Control: The gendered exploitation of young women and girls in county lines: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F17488958211051513. Hidden Girls (on BBC iPlayer): https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0010dbw/hidden-girls Some Twitter links to follow are: VG - http://twitter.com/VanessaRNMH NL - https://twitter.com/niadla​​​​​​​​​​​​​ DM - https://twitter.com/davidamunday TH - https://twitter.com/TirionHavard Credits: #mhTV Presenters: Vanessa Gilmartin, Nicky Lambert & David Munday Guest: Dr Tirion Havard Theme music: Tony Gillam Production & Editing: David Munday

In this episode I am joined by Ian Cunningham, the founder of the Self-Managed Learning College (SMLC) in Brighton; Dr Naomi Fisher, a clinical psychologist who sends her children to SMLC; and Ellie Costello, the Director of Square Peg, a social enterprise that supports young people and families with barriers to attendance. We are here to discuss the Schools Bill currently going through the English Parliament, which presents a significant challenge for people seeking to rethink education; indeed, if it goes through largely unamended, it looks like it will be a hugely retrograde step in many alarming ways, all of which we will get into in the podcast. And so, with apologies to international listeners, this episode is strongly Anglocentric. CORRECTION: Regarding Andy Bilson's research: 44% of all children will be referred to children's (social) services before their 16th birthday. RESEARCH LINKS: The Munro Review of Child Protection: Final Report A child-centred system: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/175391/Munro-Review.pdf Bilson et al - How child protection's ‘investigative turn' impacts on poor and deprived communities: http://bilson.org.uk/Family_Law_prepub.pdf MacDonald & MacDonald - Safeguarding: A Case for Intelligent Risk Management: https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/40/4/1174/1631451 Munro - Predictive analytics in child protection: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332528200_Predictive_analytics_in_child_protection Hardy (2017) - In Defence of Actuarialism: Interrogating the Logic of Risk in Social Work Practice: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02650533.2017.1394828 Contact your MP - or member of the House of Lords: https://www.parliament.uk/get-involved/contact-an-mp-or-lord/contact-your-mp Petition - We must stop the Schools Bill: Act now to protect vulnerable families from persecution: https://www.change.org/p/updated-attendance-guidance-encourages-prosecution-and-fines-of-families-facing-barriers-to-attendance-undiagnosed-children-with-send-are-particularly-at-risk-time-for-positive-action-for-send-in-education LET'S GET TOGETHER - THE RETHINKING EDUCATION CONFERENCE 2022: Tickets: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/lets-get-together-the-rethinking-education-conference-2022-tickets-226415834857 Share our social media links: Youtube (trailer): https://youtu.be/JKz8ALX2QFM Twitter: https://twitter.com/Rethinking_Ed/status/1528046472444485638 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/100004976851081/videos/706113054004294/ Linked In: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/james-mannion_too-often-the-education-debate-is-dominated-activity-6933887283146207232-53h0 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tv/Cd1b__3svlV

Remember, remember the 5th of November...as we discuss Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder Plot - the lead-up, his attempt to blow up the English Parliament, and his legacy.

Leland Whaley talks about a British member of Parliament stabbed to death at a meeting of constituents, Pete Buttigieg's bad handling of the supply-chain crisis, where to find great desserts, and more! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tax administration. Taxes in the United States are administered by hundreds of tax authorities. At the federal level there are three tax administrations. Most domestic federal taxes are administered by the Internal Revenue Service, which is part of the Department of the Treasury. Alcohol, tobacco, and firearms taxes are administered by the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB). Taxes on imports (customs duties) are administered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). TTB is also part of the Department of the Treasury and CBP belongs to the Department of Homeland Security. Organization of state and local tax administrations varies widely. Every state maintains a tax administration. A few states administer some local taxes in whole or part. Most localities also maintain a tax administration or share one with neighboring localities. Internal Revenue Service. The Internal Revenue Service administers all U.S. federal tax laws on domestic activities, except those taxes administered by TTB. IRS functions include: Processing federal tax returns (except TTB returns), including those for Social Security and other federal payroll taxes. Providing assistance to taxpayers in completing tax returns. Collecting all taxes due related to such returns. Enforcement of tax laws through examination of returns and assessment of penalties. Providing an appeals mechanism for federal tax disputes. Referring matters to the Justice Department for prosecution. Publishing information about U.S. federal taxes, including forms, publications, and other materials. Providing written guidance in the form of rulings binding on the IRS for the public and for particular taxpayers. The IRS maintains several Service Centers at which tax returns are processed. Taxpayers generally file most types of tax returns by mail with these Service Centers, or file electronically. The IRS also maintains a National Office in Washington, DC, and numerous local offices providing taxpayer services and administering tax examinations. State administrations. Every state in the United States has its own tax administration, subject to the rules of that state's law and regulations. For example, the California Franchise Tax Board. These are referred to in most states as the Department of Revenue or Department of Taxation. The powers of the state taxing authorities vary widely. Most enforce all state level taxes but not most local taxes. However, many states have unified state-level sales tax administration, including for local sales taxes. State tax returns are filed separately with those tax administrations, not with the federal tax administrations. Each state has its own procedural rules, which vary widely. Before 1776, the American Colonies were subject to taxation by Great Britain and also imposed local taxes. Property taxes were imposed in the Colonies as early as 1634. In 1673, the English Parliament imposed a tax on exports from the American Colonies, and with it created the first tax administration in what would become the United States. Other tariffs and taxes were imposed by Parliament. Most of the colonies and many localities adopted property taxes. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

In this episode of the podcast Will speaks to Mathew Hulbert, councillor for Redhall Ward, Vice Chair of Barwell Parish Council and Vice Chair of Leicestershire county council's Equalities Group. They discuss the difference between Parish and Town councils, what influence and powers councils have, the prospect of an English Parliament and the importance of housing in the UK. 

The Emancipation Act was passed and came into effect on 1 August 1834 in the English Parliament. On that day, thousands of enslaved Africans in the British West Indies became free men and women. One hundred and fifty one years later, on 1 August 1985 the government of Trinidad and Tobago declared Emancipation Day a national holiday to commemorate the abolition of slavery. What does emancipation have to do with Leadership? We need to ask ourselves - What do I need to emancipate myself from to be more effective as a leader? I offer some suggestion in this podcast . What other habits can leaders free themselves from to be more effective?

On this episode of Rightly Dividing, we are looking at the subject of Christian unity within the Christian Church that is made up of thousands of denominations, is such a thing even possible? This is the matter at hand that we will be discussing within the filter of our King James Bibles, a Book so deadly that Catholics tried to blow up the English Parliament and assassinate King James I in the process. We will also be discussing a 'unity speech' given by Roman agent Tony Palmer as he infiltrated the Charismatic Movement on a mission from the Vatican. Tonight's bible study on Christian unity will be a wild ride, so put on your big boy pants and come join us as we search the scripture of truth in God's preserved word, the King James Bible.

In this 1 hour edition, we're joined by English Heritage properties curator Roy Porter and senior properties historian Paul Pattison to trace the series of events, imprisonments and escapes that led up to the execution of King Charles I. The Stuart king remains the only British monarch to have been tried and executed for treason, marking one of the most gruesome chapters in the English Civil War – and we are picking up the story in 1646, when the Scots handed Charles over to the English Parliament. To discover more about Charles I's imprisonment at Carisbrooke Castle on the Isle of Wight, go to www.english-heritage.org.uk/carisbrooke

Learn how the British Empire's crackdown on the colonists included passing the Massachusetts Government Act of 1774, which revoked the long standing Massachusetts Charter. The act eliminated representative government in Massachusetts and installed a military commander (General Gage) as a near dictator answerable only to King George III. Explore how the other colonial legislative assemblies were suspended, crushing the republican form of government. Discover how the Declaratory Act of 1766 declared that the English Parliament could impose its will on all of the colonies "in all cases whatsoever," which in essence rendered the People of the colonies the slaves of an unaccountable empire 3000 miles away.  Produced by Patriot Week - visit PatriotWeek.org. Also check out the upcoming Patrick Henry Dinner at PatriotWeek.org, Judge Warren's book at www.AmericasSurvivalGuide.com, and the Save Our Republic! daily video series on Patriot Week's YouTube channel and PatriotWeek.org. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/michael-warren9/support

First English Parliament | 20th January 1265 | Simon de Montfort Find out the story behind the first parliament and why it was not quite as first seems. Watch this episode on YouTube Support for Free If you enjoy these videos please support me by liking, commenting and sharing them and by subscribing to the channel. Make a Donation Help me keep making content by making a donation - please go to https://www.paypal.me/britishhistorytours. You will receive a personal thank you from Philippa through the post. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/british-history/message

After the disaster of the Second Bishops' War, the English Parliament gathers once again. Prisoners are released, and new ones take their place - Archbishop William Laud, and Thomas Wentworth, the Earl of Strafford. Listen to Pontifacts: https://pod.link/1387540364 Listen to the Explorer's Podcast: https://pod.link/1161063301 Check out the podcast website: https://www.paxbritannica.info Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PodBritannica/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/BritannicaPax Patreon: https://Patreon.com/PaxBritannica Donate: https://www.paypal.com/donate?token=o8YvWF6xKTcsS1U7xAzp2EqmYBGR5vQJwvIwI4VqZk4jXzM7iczctH2l9Yo9u0RcApBuid5Ojv9Qsemh For this episode, I found the following publications particularly useful: Russell, C The Causes of the English Civil War Kishlansky, M, Monarchy Transformed Macinnes, Allan, The British Revolution, 1629-1660 Harris, T. Rebellion  Keynon, Ohlmeyer, The Civil Wars Smith, David, The Stuart Parliaments, 1603-1689 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On 19 December 1644 the English Parliament banned Christmas. EXACTLY 376 years later to the day, Boris Johnson announced that this year the celebration of Christmas would be radically curtailed due to the upsurge in Covid infections. This might be the only thing that Boris Johnson and the 17th Century Puritans have in common. On this podcast Dan meets Dr Rebecca Warren, an expert on the religious history of the 17th Century to find out about the banning of Christmas. Why it happened, and just how stringent was the enforcement? Subscribe to History Hit and you'll get access to hundreds of history documentaries, as well as every single episode of this podcast from the beginning (400 extra episodes). We're running live podcasts on Zoom, we've got weekly quizzes where you can win prizes, and exclusive subscriber only articles. It's the ultimate history package. Just go to historyhit.tv to subscribe. Use code 'pod1' at checkout for your first month free and the following month for just £/€/$1. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

On 19 December 1644 the English Parliament banned Christmas. EXACTLY 376 years later to the day, Boris Johnson announced that this year the celebration of Christmas would be radically curtailed due to the upsurge in Covid infections. This might be the only thing that Boris Johnson and the 17th Century Puritans have in common. On this podcast Dan meets Dr Rebecca Warren, an expert on the religious history of the 17th Century to find out about the banning of Christmas. Why it happened, and just how stringent was the enforcement? Subscribe to History Hit and you'll get access to hundreds of history documentaries, as well as every single episode of this podcast from the beginning (400 extra episodes). We're running live podcasts on Zoom, we've got weekly quizzes where you can win prizes, and exclusive subscriber only articles. It's the ultimate history package. Just go to historyhit.tv to subscribe. Use code 'pod1' at checkout for your first month free and the following month for just £/€/$1. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Should the English be given their own parliament? Or will regional assemblies better represent the people? Of course, there is a third option - continue with the patchwork of random institutions that are created as and when the government sees fit. This “organic” and very British way of implementing devolution has been the route taken for the past twenty years. Proponents of this view argue that “need” is better than “neatness”. I take the view that fairness is better than mess. While an English Parliament should be seen for what it is - a reactionary and narrow-minded attempt to shut people out of decision making - regional assemblies would do the opposite. It is time, I argue, for a federal UK.

Today in 1534 the English Parliament accepted the First Act of Supremacy and acknowledged  Henry VIII as the Head of the Church of England.

On Treason: A Citizen's Guide to the Law by Carlton F. W. Larson Carltonlarson.com A concise, accessible, and engaging guide to the crime of treason, written by the nation’s foremost expert on the subject Treason—the only crime specifically defined in the United States Constitution—is routinely described by judges as more heinous than murder. Today, the term is regularly tossed around by politicians and pundits on both sides of the aisle. But, as accusations of treason flood the news cycle, it is not always clear what the crime truly is, or when it should be prosecuted. Carlton F. W. Larson, a scholar of constitutional law and legal history, takes us on a journey to understand the many subtleties of the Constitution’s definition of treason. With examples ranging from the medieval English Parliament to the accusations against Edward Snowden and Donald Trump, Larson brings to life not only the most notorious accused traitors, such as Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, and World War II’s “Tokyo Rose,” but also lesser-known figures, such as Hipolito Salazar, the only person ever executed by the federal government for treason, and Walter Allen, a labor union leader convicted of treason against the state of West Virginia in the early 1920s. Grounded in over two decades of research, On Treason is an indispensable guide for anyone who wants to understand the role of treason law in our constitutional democracy. With this brisk, clear look at the law’s history and meaning, Larson explains who is actually guilty and when—and readers won’t need a law degree to understand why. CARLTON F.W. LARSON is a Martin Luther King, Jr., Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis, School of Law, where he teaches American constitutional law and English and American legal history. His scholarship has been cited by numerous federal and state courts and has been highlighted in The New York Times and many other publications. He is a frequent commentator for the national media on constitutional law issues and is the author of the books On Treason and The Trials of Allegiance (Oxford University Press, 2019).

Solicitor and BMUC member Mike Holland describes to presenter Fran Dyson Henry VIII clauses. These clauses began during King Henry's VIII's reign and continue into contemporary Australian parliamentary practices. Note: Due to technical difficulties the following information from the start of Mike's talk was not recorded. "Henry VIII died in 1547. Yet two acts of parliament passed during his reign still have an impact on how Australians are governed today. How can that be so? In 1531 the English Parliament passed the Statute of Sewers....." If you'd like to add to the discussion, you can leave an audio comment about our show, which may be added to one of our podcasts. This episode was first broadcast on Radio Blue Mountains 89.1FM on 21st August 2020. Apply to be a guest on our show. Join a union - ring 1300 486 466 or join online. Join BMUC. Rights, Rorts and Rants is broadcast from 4pm to 6pm on 89.1FM or can be live streamed from rbm.org.au. Disclaimer: We seek a range of perspectives but that means that views expressed in these podcasts are not necessarily endorsed by the Blue Mountains Unions Council Inc. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/rightsrortsandrants/message

Sophie (age 7) and Ellie (age 5) tell the story of the Battle of the Boyne in Ireland in 1690, and how it helped secure the Glorious Revolution for William, Prince of Orange. ----more---- James II is King of England, Scotland and Ireland. But he is also a Catholic. Many people – especially in England and Scotland are very worried about that. So William of Orange is invited over with his wife Mary to become King of England, Scotland and Ireland. James flees to France rather than fight. William and the English Parliament agree a new constitutional settlement. A Protestant supremacy is secured and also the rights of Parliament are guaranteed. Meanwhile an ambitious King Louis XIV sees his plans for European domination damaged. So he helps James II to try to retake his throne. This time though Louis is up against not just the Protestant countries but the Pope and his allies too. Everyone is scared of Louis’ ambition. James’ army find the gates of Londonderry / Derry shut to them by the Ulster Protestants. This gives time for William to come to Ireland with his well trained but pan European army. He defeats the James II at the Battle of the Boyne. James flees to France again. William and Mary now rule England, Scotland and Ireland. The Glorious Revolution is secure. We cover how much of the war was really about geo-politics and a family feud and rather than just religion. And we talk about the irony that a battle which is seen as symbolic of the wars between Protestants and Catholics actually had the Pope on the so called Protestant side. Having had help from the excellent Museum of the Battle of the Boyne we also talk about how some of the weaponry of the period actually worked. Explore Protestant and Catholic Europe Learn how James II loses the confidence of his nobles We learn of the secret communications between William and the English nobility We follow William’s invasion We see how James II fled rather than fight for his throne We understand the settlement that William came to which led to the Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement. We put these in their historical context. We follow the machinations of King Louis XIV, determined to rebuild his alliances. We follow James’ army as it marches to Londonderry / Derry. We hear the closing of the gates by the Apprentice Boys of Derry. Finally we re-live the excitement of the Battle of the Boyne. William’s outflanking manouvre fails. But his Dutch Guards storm across the River Boyne Held up by Jacobite cavalry charges, the battle is won when William gets his Ulster cavalry across the river. James then flees to France again. The Glorious Revolution is secure We finally discuss how some people celebrate the battle today on Orange marches in Northern Ireland. If you are interested in more on this period you might like our Great Fire of London Episode Apple: https://link.historystorytime.com/Apple-Great-Fire-London Other: https://link.historystorytime.com/Great-Fire-London Or you might like our War of Austrian Succession and Jacobite Rebellion episode in which James’ Grandson, Bonnie Prince Charlie, tried to avenge the Battle of the Boyne with the Highlanders at Culloden. Apple: https://link.historystorytime.com/Apple-Austrian-Succession Other: https://link.historystorytime.com/Austrian-Succession      

Light In The Dark Continent: Missionary MobilizationThe Quakers were a strict bunch, they tended towards rigidly structured societies. They were faithful to their way of life, implementing the rule of law. But, unfortunately, many of them came to be involved in the slave trade, a mistake staining their legacy. Eventually, the English Parliament decided to get themselves into the business of religion. Any church or pastor unwilling to conform to the Church of England would be subject to penalty. As a result, many Quakers became indentured servants in Barbados, others ended up on a colony in Pennsylvania. While there, the Quakers in tune with their sense of duty began to establish businesses. Over time the harsh penalties in London began to subside allowing the Quakers in Philadelphia to work with the Quakers in London. They established massively profitable trade between London and Pennsylvania. These businesses often directly or indirectly supported the ongoing slave trade. Learn more about Plenteous Redemption: https://plenteousredemption.com/Plenteous Redemption Podcast Audio: https://www.plenteousredemption.media/Plenteous Redemption On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIT5Cf913W6tsnANe_YSfmQ

On this day in Tudor history, 23rd March 1540, Waltham Abbey, an Augustinian house in Essex, was surrendered to the Crown. It was the last abbey to be dissolved in Henry VIII and Thomas Cromwell's dissolution of the monasteries.  Find out more about this historic abbey, its origins and what's left today, and also who profited from its lands, in today's talk from Claire Ridgway, author of "Tudor Places of Great Britain". You can see this podcast as a video at the following link:https://youtu.be/O3X4-fZcsvQ Also on this day in Tudor history, 23rd March 1534, the Pope issued a bull proclaiming Catherine of Aragon to be England's true queen and Mary the heir to the throne, while the English Parliament declared Anne Boleyn to be England's rightful queen and her daughter, Elizabeth, the heir. Find out more about this strange situation in last year’s video - https://youtu.be/h_j-UCM8V6E 

                                       The Glory of God—the Meaning of Life In 1642, the English Parliament led by Oliver Cromwell and the Puritans in England started a civil war against the royalists and King Charles. The Parliament forces won and began putting a coalition of Protestant groups together to agree on Christian doctrine. King Charles claimed to be […]

Welcome back to another episode of Liberty Revealed, the show dedicated to revealing personal liberty to all who listen. I am your host, Mike Mahony, and today I want to talk to you about lying to a governmental body.Every state in the United States has laws regarding public meetings. These laws prescribe the procedures for open public meetings. From the notice requirements to what legislators can address during a meeting, these laws aim to provide transparency in government. The concept is most definitely positive. Keeping government transparent is essential to the progress of the liberty movement. In July of 1987, the Los Angeles Times published an article that has a very important title -- “Brown Act Keeps Sun Shining on Government.”  For those who don’t know, the Brown Act is California’s open meetings law. These laws work best in smaller settings like commissions and school board meetings because there is very little public attendance at these meetings. These open meeting laws force the government to conduct business in the so-called light of day. Is this necessarily a good thing?Open meeting laws require that, with notable exceptions, most meetings of federal and state government agencies and regulatory bodies be open to the public, along with their decisions and records.Although open meeting statutes are closely related to the Freedom of Information Act of 1966, no national minimum standard defines “openness,” and it is not mentioned in the First Amendment. Much of the litigation over open meeting laws has centered on whether particular exceptions justify closing certain meetings of government bodies.These laws ensure the public’s right to access to the internal workings of government at all levels. This “right” cannot be traced back to America’s common law tradition with England or to practices in place when the United States was founded.Until the mid-1800s, sessions of the English Parliament were closed to the public, and attempts to publish its debates in the press were punishable offenses. In America, sessions of the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention were held in secret.Although neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights requires public access to government meetings, the principle is entirely compatible with the concept of popular sovereignty and an informed citizenry. The freedoms of speech, the press, and the right to petition the government in the First Amendment all presuppose a “right to access.” To criticize or support a government policy effectively, citizens must be informed of the reasons for that policy.In the 1950s, even before Congress enacted the Freedom of Information Act, the American Society of Newspaper Editors had formed the Freedom of Information Committee. It pressured state legislatures to enact “open meetings” laws as part of a general move toward more responsive and responsible government.By 1976 all of the states and the District of Columbia had passed sunshine laws that created a legal right to (limited) access.In general, most statutes require public bodies to meet and deliberate in public.Although these laws guarantee that the public and the media can attend, they do not guarantee the public’s right to speak.What constitutes a meeting is usually defined by its purpose — to perform public business (social gatherings are not considered meetings) — and the number of participants—a quorum or majority. All such meetings, unless specifically and legally exempted, are presumed to be open to the public, and agencies are required to give advance notice of the date, time, place, and agenda.Exempted meetings are normally held in closed executive session and may be devoted to such things as personnel issues, ongoing investigations, collective bargaining, conferences with agency attorneys, the acquisition or sale of public property, or a debate among members of the agency prior to a decision.Nevertheless, the agency must compile minutes or transcripts, and formal action must be taken in a public session. Both federal and state legislatures have the discretion to enact statutes to change or add exemptions at any time.This brings me full-circle back to the topic of today’s show--lying to a governmental body. It has recently been suggested that local government bodies such as city councils should put people under oath before allowing them to speak in front of that body. The reason for this suggestion is to avoid situations where someone comes before the body to lie to them. Is this a good idea or a bad idea? Let’s think it through, shall we?Proponents say that lying is fraud. They argue (as do Libertarians) that fraud is a crime society cannot stand for. But are lies always fraud?The legal definition requires that for a lie to be fraud, it has to be an intentional lie. If you truly believe you are telling the truth, but it is determined you were wrong, that does not qualify as fraud. That doesn't excuse willful denial or ignorance of the truth. If you should have known the truth or could easily have discovered it before telling the lie, it could still be a problem.The second part is about the liar's intention. A lie that you don't mean anyone to take seriously, such as a joke or hyperbole, wouldn't constitute fraud.When it comes to proving intent for fraud, courts often look at what the liar could gain if someone believes the lie. If the liar benefits from someone believing and acting on the lie, that tends to show intent.The legal analysis will also rely on context. A lie, while you’re trying to sell your house, is more likely to result in a lawsuit than a lie told over drinks at a bar. Those are obvious examples, but there are many situations in between where the line isn't so easy to see.The third element is whether the lie actually caused harm.If the listener believed the lie, acted as if it were true, and suffered some kind of injury because of that belief, then there may be some liability for fraud.Injury can mean actual physical harm or financial loss. In general, emotional "pain" isn't enough to build a case for fraud.In general, anything other than a white lie (like how nice your spouse looks) should be avoided. Remember, a lie runs the risk of becoming fraud if you expect the listener to act on the lie. Keeping it honest isn't just good personal policy; it's a sound legal strategy too.So why not put people speaking at public comments under oath? You would be able to hold them accountable if they lied under oath. You would be able to take action against those who lie for personal gain. An example of where this would apply happened recently at a Buena Park City Council meeting.I am part of a group of people who have been trying to recall a corrupt councilmember. We attended a public meeting and were accosted by the husband of one of that councilmember’s staunchest supporters. When I say accosted, I mean we were physically assaulted. The entire incident was captured on video.A week later that man appeared at City Council and stood up to tell his side of the story. He claimed he was merely protecting his wife. He claimed his wife was being attacked and he simply stepped in as her defender. The problem is the video evidence clearly stated otherwise. It clearly showed he was the aggressor. But what was his purpose in lying at City Council?We may never know, but several speculated that he was attempting to set up some kind of legal action against our group. At the very least, he was committing libel against us. He knew he was lying and he knew he was attempting to gain personally from those lies. He had committed fraud by the legal definition. Had he spoken under oath, he may have been in some hot water.While I can see the benefits in a situation like this, I question whether making people speak under oath will accomplish the right goal. I don’t believe most people go to a City Council meeting to intentionally lie. I fear that forcing them to be under oath would discourage people from exercising their First Amendment rights. I am afraid that people would fear prosecution for perjury if they spoke out at a public meeting and what they said turned out to be false. I know many will say they simply have to prove that any untruthful statements were unintentional, but I ask why they should need to prove that in the first place.In order to come to a conclusion about this issue, I think we need a better understanding of how many people intentionally lie at these meetings. If it is a rampant problem, putting people under oath is something to consider, but if it is a minor, once in a blue moon type of issue, putting people under oath has too many negative connotations for it to be a good thing. Tell me your thoughts on this by leaving a voicemail on the Yogi’s Podcast Network hotline at (657) 529-2218.That’s it for this episode of Liberty Revealed. .If you like what you’ve heard, please rate us 5 stars on Apple Podcasts and Google Play. If you’d like to learn more about personal liberty, grab your free copy of my book “Liberty Revealed” by heading over to http://yogispodcastnetwork.com/libertyrevealed. Until next time...stay free!

(Nathan) The English Civil War of the mid-17th century ended in the beheading of King Charles I and the establishment of the Commonwealth under of Oliver Cromwell. It also marked a turning point in the celebration of Christmas in Britain and its American colonies. In this episode, we will examine the rise of Puritan groups to power in the English Parliament, their attitudes toward the moral and ritual reform of the English Church, and how these groups in Britain and the colonies sought to purge Catholic and "pagan" influences in their society by banning the celebration of Christmas.

In this episode we discuss the essentials of Parliamentary Procedure, including the history of parliament, the core principles of orderly debate, and the basic structure of the U.S. Congress. We begin with a brief history of the mother of Parliaments, the English Parliament. From there, we discuss the core tenets of Parliamentary procedure, including the principle of orderly debate, and the committee structure. Finally, we outline the shape of the modern U.S. Congress and how legislative bills become laws.

Guy Fawkes (13 April 1570 – 31 January 1606) also known as Guido Fawkes while fighting for the Spanish, was a member of a group of provincial English Catholics who planned to kill King James 1 of England as well as most of English Parliament in the failed Gunpowder Plot of 1605. Thanks for watching and thanks to Laura "Fuckallhell" for the support and great topic suggestion. I learned a ton of history because of this one. I've started a podcast to download to listen offline: http://letsfindoutasmr.libsyn.com/ (select videos) https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/l... (iTunes) #ASMR #history #England My current reading list (for those interested): Richard P. Feynman "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out" https://amzn.to/2Ftse3n Carl Jung "The Red Book" https://amzn.to/2TYBkbN Nietzsche "Beyond Good and Evil" https://amzn.to/2DcVyc4 Warren Ashby "Comprehensive History of Western Ethics: What Do We Believe?" https://amzn.to/2T1Let6 Jordan Peterson "Maps of Meaning" https://amzn.to/2FuirKj Carl Jung "Aion" https://amzn.to/2SZ52Ny James J. Walsh "Thirteenth: Greatest of Centuries" https://amzn.to/2SWxJe9 Walter Kaufman "Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist" https://amzn.to/2MdrTlR Michael O'Mara "The History of the World in Bite-Sized Chunks" https://amzn.to/2MhjBJW Bryan Magee "The Story of Philosophy: A Concise Introduction to the World's Greatest Thinkers and Their Ideas" https://amzn.to/2SY9Kej ------------------------------------------------------------------ ►socials: •Email................... letsfindoutASMR@gmail.com •Instagram........... @lets_find_out_asmr •Twitter................. @Glycoversi ------------------------------------------------------------------ ►If you'd like to help support the channel: •A small kick-back from your purchases: https://amzn.to/2LnNXd6 •Amazon wishlist: http://a.co/9vUJ8eF •Venmo ......... @RichMcdaniel89 •PayPal ......... https://www.paypal.me/LetsFindOutASMR •Patreon ........ https://www.patreon.com/LetsFindOutASMR •Bitcoin: (A scannable QR code) ........ http://i.imgur.com/wKIsPIB.png (wallet address) ........ 1XPhPoyeqc3Xf1uktCPXCzfdEdi9PA7Xh If you'd like to mail me something (or send Penny a treat): Let's Find Out ASMR (Rich) P.O. Box 1582 Palm City, FL 34991 ------------------------------------------------------------------ ►my ASMR playlists: Space: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVojBLpecXuXY66IZixixYf8aE-FOozO1 History: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVojBLpecXuV3POreugMZyg9XTgxUZgGx Science: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVojBLpecXuU3-fEgM4V1T5P8U6l2_p2D Philosophy: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVojBLpecXuU5kJPgNLyObyNQwyjmxOgy ------------------------------------------------------------------ ►ASMR channels you'll be happy you found: Niceguy Eddie ASMR (genuine, calm, funny) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU2gMPY0tjN7ZLKQx6E9cNg TirarADeguello (Fun, Creative, deep voice, graceful) https://www.youtube.com/user/TirarADeguello ASMRctica (Relaxing deep voice, graceful drawing, maps) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCi8QgZckGYg3RFvEbdkMWfg French Whisperer (Deep voice, educational, history, science) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSkS5vtp5gY3huyVkX4IfMw Chycho (Kind personality, math, comics, just a cool guy) https://www.youtube.com/user/chychochycho Phoenician Sailor (Deep voice, immersive roleplays, thoughtful) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKKaOoUZARUeHArVEN59GPA Gaslamp ASMR (Deep voice, unique antiques, graceful) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrhhWOOFKbEfqzF3-lNqp3A Tingles with Flyby (Soft spoken, creative role plays, books, maps) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCA30038vHYKugElnG8EbM8g The ASMR Nerd (Soft voice, gameplay, quality tech reviews) https://www.youtube.com/user/theASMRnerd

In our final programme, we hear about how the Fr. Robert O'Keeffe affair went on to influence proceedings in the English Parliament and explore why the English decided not to get involved.

1685 was a watershed year for events that would lead to what we call the Enlightenment. France´s Sun King Louis XIV revoked the Edict of Nantes and initiated a policy of religious persecution of Protestants. In England, the Catholic James II assumed the throne to the horror of the protestant majority in Parliament. From their exiles in the Dutch Republic, the French philosopher Pierre Bayle wrote his groundbreaking defense of religious tolerance “Commentaire Philosophique” and John Locke wrote the original Latin version of his Letter Concerning Toleration. In this episode, we trace the seeds of the Enlightenment covering events in France, the Dutch Republic, and England. Why did Louis XIV revoke the Edict of Nantes and what were the consequences? Why did the Dutch Republic become famous for its religious tolerance and open debate in the 17th Century? Who was the late 16th century Dutch thinker who opposed censorship six decades before Milton? Why were several members of Spinoza´s circle of radical Dutch freethinkers targeted by censorship and repression? Why was the complete work of Spinoza and even the reworking of his ideas banned in the Dutch Republic? Why were Pierre Bayle’s ideas so controversial that he lost his professorship? Why did the Anglican majority in the English Parliament oppose religious tolerance favoured by both Charles II and James II? How tolerant was the Toleration Act really? How did John Locke provide the intellectual killer blow to the English Licensing Act? What were the consequences of the end of pre-publication censorship in England? You can subscribe and listen to Clear and Present Danger on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, YouTube, TuneIn, and Stitcher, or download episodes directly from SoundCloud. Stay up to date with Clear and Present Danger on the show’s Facebook and Twitter pages, or visit the podcast’s website at freespeechhistory.com.

Dr Patrick Little (History of Parliament): 'Ormond and the Invaders: new light on the surrender of Dublin to the English Parliament in 1647'.

When the New Model Army's leaders wanted the English Parliament to put King Charles I on trial for treason, they faced the problem that most Members of Parliament did not want to put the King on trial. So Colonel Thomas Pride and his Regiment of Foot were placed on the steps of Parliament, only allowing sympathetic members inside. Essentially, Pride's Purge was a coup d'etat which happened so easily no one even fought back. Partly, this was because Parliament had been fighting the King for eight years. In a Civil War, England had seen pitched battles where Parliament's New Model Army, led by Oliver Cromwell, beat the Royalist forces of Charles I. Officially, Charles had accepted Parliament's demands, until he decided to flee. That led to a second Civil War, which saw a military occupation of London, where Thomas Pride was a commander. That's why the New Model Army stationed his Regiment of Foot in the way of Parliament. The strategy worked so well that only 200 of the 471 Members were left in what became known as the "Rump Parliament." It was that Parliament that would subsequently and swiftly try King Charles and execute him.

It was Luke Gardiner, later known as Lord Mountjoy, who spoke to the English Parliament after the Revolutionary War and stated, "America was lost through the actions of her Irish immigrants." In total, at least twenty of George Washington's generals were of Irish descent. Today, like so many times on this show, the question asked is just where would we be were it not for the Irish? Glory, Glory, Halleluiah, Windy City Irish Radio marches on! Join Mike and Tim as they celebrate the 240th anniversary of our nation's birth with patriotic music from U2, Derek Warfield, Gene Kelly, Ronan Tynan, Eileen Ivers with Niamh Parsons, Pete Seeger with The Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem and sounds of the summer season from The Corrs, Maura O'Connell, Gaelic Storm and Mundy. Happy Birthday USA! Join Tim and Mike every Wednesday night from 8PM - 9PM on WSBC 1240 AM or catch the podcast here www.windycityirishradio.com

Professor Chaudhuri speaks at the South Asia Seminar on a public meeting held in Calcutta, on December 15th, 1829. On December 15th , 1829, a large public meeting was held amidst much excitement at the Town Hall in Calcutta. The speakers, principally from the British mercantile community in Calcutta, but including, prominently, Dwarakanath Tagore and Rammohun Roy, spoke on behalf of a petition to be sent to the English Parliament arguing for what they called "The Colonization of India". The debate centred on the upcoming renewal of the Charter Act, and this community pressed for further abolishing remaining monopolies the East India Company held. I will show how the disputes generated on the subject played out in Calcutta at the time, and also, crucially, show how Rammohun’s involvement in the event and his later evidence before the Select Committee was misread by leading Marxist historians affiliated to the CSSSC in the 1970s. Rosinka Chaudhuri is Professor of Cultural Studies and Dean (Academic Affairs) at the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Calcutta (CSSSC). She has published: Gentlemen Poets in Colonial Bengal: Emergent Nationalism and the Orientalist Project (Seagull: 2002), Freedom and Beef-Steaks: Colonial Calcutta Culture (Orient Blackswan: 2012) and The Literary Thing: History, Poetry and the Making of a Modern Literary Culture (Oxford University Press: 2013, Peter Lang: 2014), and has edited: Derozio, Poet of India: A Definitive Edition (Oxford University Press, 2008), and, with Elleke Boehmer, The Indian Postcolonial (Routledge, 2010). Her most recent publication is A History of Indian Poetry in English, published by Cambridge University Press, New York, in March 2016. She has also translated and introduced the complete text of the letters Rabindranath Tagore wrote his niece Indira Debi as a young man, calling it Letters from a Young Poet (1887-94) (Penguin Modern Classics, 2014); this received an Honorable Mention in the category A.K. Ramanujan Prize for Translation (S. Asia) at the Association for Asian Studies Book Prizes 2016. Currently, she is editing and introducing An Acre of Green Grass: English Writings of Buddhadeva Bose for Oxford University Press, New Delhi. Her current research is tentatively titled Young Bengal and the Empire of the Middle Classes. This seminar series is organised with the support of the History Faculty.

Kathy's show covers the history of the United States, from the early settlements to present day, focusing on significant events. Included are the development of the founding documents, the structure of American government on the federal and state level, and the people that make America a unique, stimulating nation.This episode is Show #62 in the continuing series of "American History" episodes that discusses "King James VI and I and the English Parliament".  This episode is the second of two parts.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/new-heights-show-on-education--4114185/support.

Kathy's show covers the history of the United States, from the early settlements to present day, focusing on significant events. Included are the development of the founding documents, the structure of American government on the federal and state level, and the people that make America a unique, stimulating nation.This episode is Show #61 in the continuing series of "American History" episodes that discusses "King James VI and I and the English Parliament".  This episode is the fist of two parts.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/new-heights-show-on-education--4114185/support.

The title of this episode is Faith in the Age of Reason, Part 2.In our last episode we briefly considered Jakob Hermanzoon, the Dutch theologian who'd sat under the tutelage of Theodore Beza, John Calvin's successor at the Academy in Geneva. We know Hermanzoon better by his Latin name Jacobus Arminius.Arminius took exception to Beza's views on predestination and when he became pastor of a church in Amsterdam, created a stir among his Calvinist colleagues. It was while teaching a series of sermons on the Book of Romans that Arminius became convinced Beza had several things wrong. The implication was that because Beza was Calvin's successor and the standard-bearer for Calvinism, Arminius contradicted Calvin. Things came to a head when Arminius' colleague Peter Planck began to publicly dispute with him.Arminius hated controversy, seeing it as a dangerous distraction to the cause of the Gospel and pressed for a synod to deal with the matter, believing once his views were set alongside Scripture, he'd be vindicated.In 1603, Arminius was called to the University at Leiden to teach when one of the faculty members died. The debate Arminius had been having with Planck was shifted to a new controversy with one of the other professors at Leiden, François Gomaer.This controversy lasted the next six yrs as the supporters of both Calvinism and Arminius grew in number and determination. The synod Arminius had pressed for was eventually held, but not till nine years after his death in 1609.In the meantime, just a year after his death, Arminius' followers gathered his writings and views and issued what they regarded as a formal statement of his ideas. Called the Five Articles of the Remonstrants, or just the Remonstrance, it was a formal proposal to the government of Holland detailing the points of difference that had come to a head over the previous years in the debate between Arminius and Gomaer.Those 5 points were –That the divine decree of predestination is conditioned on Faith, not absolute in Election.That the intent of the Atonement is universal;Man cannot of himself exercise a saving faith;That though the grace of God is a necessary condition of human effort it does not act irresistibly in man; and finally -By the enabling power of the Holy Spirit, believers are able to resist sin but are not beyond the possibility of falling from grace. In 1618, the Dutch Church called the Synod of Dort to answer the Remonstrance. The results of the Synod, called the Canons of Dort, strongly upheld Theodore Beza's formulation of the Calvinist doctrine of predestination and developed their own five-point response to the Remonstrance.It comes as a major surprise to most students of Church history to learn that TULIP, or the famous Five Points of Calvinism were a RESPONSE to the challenge of Arminianists; that they'd come up with their 5 points first. Most people who've heard of Calvinism and Arminianism have never even heard of the Remonstrance; yet it's the thing that formalized the debate between the two camps; a debate that's continued to today and has led to some prolific arguments and controversies among Christians.Put a Presbyterian elder and Methodist deacon in a room together and let the fun begin!Now, lest we think the Protestants fell out in the Calvinist-Arminianist brouhaha while the Catholics sat back, ate popcorn and watched the show, realize things were FAR from being all united and just one big happy family over in the Roman sector of the Church. Catholics were no monolithic entity at this time. It was a mixed bag of different groups and viewpoints with their own internal disagreements.In the late 16th and early 17th Cs there was a long dispute between the Jesuits and the Dominicans over how divine grace and human free-will interacted.In the late 17th C, Pope Innocent XI, spent his reign playing a power game with Louis XIV and the Gallic theologians who believed in the authority of the Church, but not the Pope.More serious was the rise of Jansenism. This movement grew out of the work of   Cornelius Jansen, a professor at Louvain University. Jansen published a book in 1640 titled Augustinus, in which he stated what he believed were the doctrines of Augustine. Jansen sounded a lot like Calvin and argued that divine grace can't be resisted, meaning it overrides the human will. He fiercely opposed the doctrine of the Jesuits that salvation depended on cooperation between divine grace and human will. So, the Jansenists believed in predestination, which meant that although they were Catholics they were in some ways more like Calvinists.Jansenism proved a thorn in the side of the Catholic Church, and especially the Jesuits, for quite a while. Its leading exponent after Jansen himself was Antoine Arnauld, an intellectual and cultural giant of the 17th C. Arnauld corresponded with such philosophical luminaries as Descartes and Leibniz. He possessed a penetrating critical faculty; and as a theologian he was no less brilliant.But back to our previous theme, stated at the beginning of the last episode – Protestant Scholasticism, or the Age of Confessionalism, in which the various branches of the Protestant church began to coalesce around distinctive statements of their theology.The Anglican Church of England occupied a curious position in the midst of all this. On the one hand it was a Protestant church, having been created in the 1530s when King Henry VIII took command of the existing Catholic Church in England. The Lutheran sympathies of his advisers, like Thomas Cranmer and Thomas Cromwell, influenced the new church, but so too did the Catholic tendencies of later monarchs like Charles I and churchmen such as William Laud. Unlike other churches throughout Europe, the Church of England rarely had to struggle for the soul of its nation with another movement. So it had never been forced to define its beliefs and practices in the face of opposition to others. By the turn of the 18th C, the one thing all Anglicans agreed on was a shared distrust of Roman Catholics.The doctrinal openness of the Church of England meant that it was in England that religious free-thinking had the greatest chance of taking root. In the late 16th C it was still possible to be burnt at the stake in England for denying the Trinity, but a C later those who asserted such things had no need to fear anything more damaging than government censure and a deluge of refutations by the clergy. The Church of England prided itself on its doctrinal orthodoxy, understood in terms of common sense, and a middle way between what were regarded as the bizarre excesses of continental Protestants and Catholics. This middle way was based on what its followers felt was a healthy respect, but refusal to fawn, for tradition. This took shape in the principle of the apostolic succession, an ancient Christian notion we've examined in previous episodes. Apostolic succession claims that Christian doctrines can be known to be trustworthy because they are taught in churches which were founded by the apostles or their immediate followers. In other words, great trust was placed in the notion of an unbroken chain of tradition going back to the apostles themselves. It was this ‘apostolic succession', together with the Scriptures, themselves handed down as part of this authoritative tradition, that mainstream Anglicans felt guaranteed the trustworthiness of their church. By contrast, many thought, the Catholics had added to that tradition over the centuries, while the more extreme Protestants had subtracted from it.There was considerable tension between the churches. The worst example was France, where after the Revocation of the Treaty of Nantes in 1685 Protestants were an actively persecuted minority: they felt especially threatened by surrounding Catholics, and all the more determined never to give in to them. Persecution only strengthened their resolve and inspired sympathy from Protestants throughout the Continent, who by the same token became increasingly hostile to Catholicism.In England, Catholicism was the minority faith: officially banned, its priests had to operate in secrecy.There's a story from this time of a Catholic bishop who, functioning as a kind of religious spy, held Mass in an east London pub for a congregation of Irish workers disguised as beer-guzzling patrons.Many people were scared of Catholics, whom they regarded as tools of a foreign power; those sneaky French or the Pope. There was also great suspicion of ‘Dissenters'—members of any churches other than the Church of England. ‘Dissenters' and Catholics alike, it was feared, were eating away at the social fabric of the country, and the policies of tolerance followed by the Whig party were opposed by many. Some Anglican churchmen formed a party with the slogan ‘Church in Danger', which spent its time campaigning against Catholics, Dissenters, deists, the principle of toleration and, essentially, everything that the Enlightenment had produced.In 1778, the English Parliament passed the Catholic Relief Act, which decriminalized Catholicism—to the enormous anger of a sizeable minority in the population. Two years later a Scottish aristocrat named Lord George Gordon led a huge mob to London, resulting in a week of riots in which Catholic churches were looted, foreign embassies burnt, and nearly 300 people were killed.But we ought not think it was all petty small-mindedness that ruled the day. There were some who worked tirelessly to effect peace between the warring camps of Christendom. In the 17th C, a number of attempts were made to open a dialogue between Roman Catholic and Protestant churches with the aim of reuniting them.The godfather of this endeavor, sometimes known as ‘syncretism', was a German Lutheran theologian named George Callixtus. He devoted huge effort in the early 17th C to find common ground between the different groups. Like his contemporary Hugo Grotius in the Reformed Church, he believed it should be possible to use the Apostles' Creed, and a belief in the authority of the Bible alone, as a basis for agreement among Christians.Callixtus made progress with Calvinists but the Catholics were less receptive. The Conference of Thorn, called by King Vladislav IV of Poland in 1645, attempted to put these ideas into practice, but after several weeks of discussions the Catholic, Lutheran and Calvinist theologians were unable to pull anything substantive together.Sadly, Callixtus's efforts met with the greatest opposition from his fellow Lutherans.Let's turn now from the acrimony and controversy that marked Protestant Scholasticism for a moment to take a look at a guy more like the rest of us; at least we probably hope so.He was an obscure, uneducated Frenchman of the late 17th C.Nicolas Herman, a manservant from Lorraine, tried to live his life around what he called ‘the practice of the presence of God'. He was not a very good manservant, having a pronounced limp from his army days and appallingly clumsy; but he performed his duties diligently until 1651, when, at the age of 40, he went to Paris and became a Carmelite monk. His monk's name was Lawrence of the Resurrection.Brother Lawrence was put to work in the monastery's kitchen—a task he hated, but which he did anyway because it was God's will. To the surprise of the other monks, he not only did his work calmly and methodically, but spoke to God the entire time. Brother Lawrence declared that, to him, there was no difference between the time for work and the time for prayer: wherever he was, and whatever he was doing, he tried to perceive the presence of God. As he wrote to one of his friends:“There is not in the world a kind of life more sweet and delightful, than that of a continual conversation with God: the only ones who can understand it are those who practice and experience it. But I do not advise you to do it from that motive. It is not pleasure which we ought to seek in this exercise, but let us do it from a principle of love, and because God would have us. If I were a preacher, I would, above all other things, preach the practice of the presence of God. And if I were a spiritual director, I would advise all the world to do it. That is how necessary I think it is—and how easy, too.”Brother Lawrence became a minor celebrity among the hierarchy of the French Catholic Church, and he was visited by more than one archbishop, anxious to see if the reports of his humility and holiness were true. Lawrence's sixteen Letters and Spiritual Maxims testify of his sincere belief in God's presence in all things and his trust in God to see him through all things. They also testify to the way in which holy men and women continued to devote themselves to God's will, both in and out of monasteries, even as the intellectual revolutions of the Enlightenment were at their height.It's easy when considering the Age of Reason, to suppose theology was increasingly being seduced by philosophy, and that the simple, heartfelt faith of the commoners of the Middle Ages and the Reformation was being replaced by rationalism. That was true in some quarters, but the 17th and 18th centuries had their share of sincere and pious saints, as well as heretics, as much as any age; and there were some important movements that recalled the faithful to a living and wholehearted religion. As the theologians bickered, ordinary Christians were getting on with things, as they always had.As we bring this episode to a close, I want to end with a look at Blaise Pascal. That's a great name, isn't it? Blaise. Sounds like a professional skateboarder.Pascal was a Jansenist, that is, a member of the Roman Catholic reform movement we took a look at a moment ago. While the Jansenists began as a movement that sought to return the Roman Church to the teachings of Augustine, since Augustine's doctrines were considered as being based in Scripture, the Jansenists were a Roman Catholic kind of back to the Bible movement.A few days after Blaise Pascal's death, one of his servants noticed a curious bulge in the great scientist's jacket. Opening the lining, he withdrew a folded parchment written by Pascal with these words . . .The year of grace 1654. Monday, November 23rd.,… from about half past ten in the evening until about half past twelve, God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob, not of the philosophers and scholars. >> Certainty, certainty, feeling, joy, peace. >> God of Jesus Christ, I have separated myself from Him. I have fled from Him, Renounced Him, crucified Him. May I never be separated from Him. Renunciation, total and sweet.For eight years Pascal had hid those words in his coat, withdrawing them now and again to read them and be reminded of the moment when grace seized his soul.Pascal's mother died when he was only three. His father, Stephen Pascal, began the education of his children, Gilbert, Blaise, and Jacqueline. Occasionally he took the young Blaise with him to meetings of the Academy of Science. The youth's scientific curiosity was aroused.Before he reached the age of 27 Pascal had gained the admiration of mathematicians in Paris; had invented the calculating machine for his father who was a busy tax-collector; and had discovered the basic principles of atmospheric and hydraulic pressures. He belonged to the age of the Scientific Greats.Blaise's initial contact with the Jansenists came as the result of an accident his father had. On an icy day in January, 1646, Stephen tried to prevent a duel. He fell on the hard frozen ground and dislocated a hip. The physicians who treated him were devoted Jansenists. They succeeded not only in curing their patient but in winning his son to their doctrines.They told the Pascals physical suffering was an illustration of a basic religious truth: man is helpless; a miserable creature. Blaise had seldom enjoyed a day without pain. He knew how helpless physicians could be, so the argument struck him with unusual force. It deepened his sense of the tragic mystery of life.He also learned from these Jansenist physicians how profoundly the Bible speaks to the human condition. He became an avid student of Scripture, pondering its pages as he had atmospheric pressures. He came to see the Bible as a way to a transformed heart.In 1651, Pascal's personal tragedy deepened with the death of his father. The loss brought him to a crisis. His sister, Jacqueline, renounced the world by entering the Port-Royal convent, and Blaise was left alone in Paris.He now gave himself to worldly interests. He took a richly furnished home, staffed it with servants, and drove about town in a coach drawn by four horses; an extravagance. He pursued the ways of elite but decadent Parisian society. After a year of pleasure he found only a “great disgust with the world,” and he plunged into quiet desperation. He felt abandoned by God.Blaise turned again to the Bible, to the 17th ch of the Gospel of John, where Jesus prepares for His sacrifice on the cross. It was then that Pascal felt a new blaze of the Spirit. As he wrote, “Certainty, certainty, feeling, joy, peace.”Pascal's new faith drew him magnetically into the orbit of the Jansenists. Late in 1654, he joined his sister, Jacqueline, as a member of the Port-Royal community. He was then asked by one of the Jansenist leaders for assistance in his defense against the attack of the Jesuits.Pascal responded brilliantly. He penned eighteen Public Letters exposing Jesuit errors in flashes of eloquence and sarcastic wit. As each letter appeared, the public snatched them up. They were instant best-sellers. Port-Royal was no longer an obscure Jansenist monastery; it was a center of public interest. The Pope condemned the Letters, but all educated French read them, as succeeding generations did for the next two centuries.Upon completing the Letters in March, 1657, Pascal planned a book on the evidences for Christianity. He was never able to complete it. In June, ‘62, he was seized with a violent illness and, after lingering a couple months, died on August 19 at the age of just 39.Friends found portions of his writing on faith and reason, and eight years after his death they published these notes under the title Thoughts (Pensées-Pahn'-sees). In the Pensées, Pascal is a religious genius who cuts across doctrine and pierces to the heart of man's moral problem. He appeals to the intellect by his passion for truth and arouses the emotions by his merciless descriptions of the plight of man without God.Man, Pascal said, is part angel and part beast; a Chimera. In Greek mythology the chimera was a she-goat with a lion's head and a serpent's tail. Pascal wrote, “What a Chimera is man! What a novelty, a monster, a chaos, a contradiction, a prodigy! The glory and refuse of the universe. Who shall unravel this confusion?”Reason, as great a faculty as it is, is no sure guide, Pascal warns. If we trust reason alone, we will doubt everything except pain and death. But our hearts tell us this cannot be true. That would be the greatest of all blasphemies to think that life and the universe have no meaning. God and the meaning of life must be felt by the heart, rather than by reason. It was Pascal who said, “The heart has its reasons which reason does not know.”He saw the human condition so deeply yet so clearly that men and women in our own time, after three centuries, still gain perspective from him for their own spiritual pilgrimage.