Login Register

Discussion

“Cornish Genocide and the Truth?

What do you know or what do you care, do you have an opinion you would like to share?”

By youngcornwall Posted: March 11, 2012

562 comments

562 replies

Start the discussion

max 4000 characters
  • youngcornwall  |  March 11 2012, 9:14AM

    Genocide what Genocide? Genocide genocide the Cornish nationalists cry too many of our kin folk they had to die No way can we ever forgive and forget and leave those who died without our respect Far too long this has gone unsaid lets get together and put this to bed We have the internet now and everything at hand so why not join the nationalists and their happy band They will hold the living ancestors to account for the things that once befell our land And if the nationalists can get what they want And a little bit more that will be grand. So be very careful when you fly a flag in these parts not only a flag it could be close to other peoples hearts Something to fight for something to make worthwhile nothing to smirk at or to make you smile. youngcornwall

  • Slimslad  |  March 11 2012, 9:38AM

    Not the "ethnic-cleansing" that some would have us believe. Catholics in Devon,Cornwall and Norfolk rebelling in protest against Protestant reforms.

  • Taxman100  |  March 11 2012, 5:13PM

    Give us all a break from nationalism: which relies entirely upon repeatedly rewritten ancient history and has absolutely no place in our modern society, other than to be referred too as history. Woodbury Common, Crediton, The siege of Exeter, Fenny Bridges, and Clyst St. Mary were all part of the 1549 Prayer Book Rebellion. The Cornish rebelled and got slaughtered - whose fault was that I wonder? Those really were the days of battle and slaughter! And, consequently created great tales of Myth & Legend with which to terrify the children. I suspect it was all a little like the march of the 20,000 Western Men - to Bristol - it became increasingly exaggerated every time it was rewritten - usually, by those of a nationalists persuasion. As for the flying of flags; I am a proud Cornishman but fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St. George - not a flag whose origins are completely unknown; and I know there are many more Cornishmen just like me.

  • youngcornwall  |  March 11 2012, 7:44PM

    If there is any element of truth in this genocide theory, which relates to present times we should all want to know, there are some who are adamant about such things, as this below illustrates very clearly and is straight off the nats site. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! - They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide That England imposes With smiles and Red Roses Where the innocents, so gullibly, reside. http://tinyurl.com/6tyd6ed

  • Slimslad  |  March 11 2012, 8:03PM

    Not to be taken seriously, surely? There have been some comments on Cornwall24 as to why the e-petition to support "Cornwall as a National Minority" has only gained 809 votes, as opposed to the 50,000 that voted in 2000. "Not everyone has access to online computers"?

  • Taxman100  |  March 12 2012, 10:19AM

    youngcornwall. Are you suggesting 1549,(462 years ago) may be considered to be, 'present times'? I doubt if anyone would agree with that sentiment. Furthermore, what happened in 1549 - which also affected the Prayer Book Rebels from Norfolk - was common practice during the period in which it occurred. ie: rebellions against the Crown were always routed, and slaughter of the participants was common place - did the Cornish not do precisely the same? Yes, they did! So, it wasn't quite as one sided as some would have us believe. We must never take history out of context and period; although some, for political reasons, would like to do so. Finally, as I have repeatedly said in various comments in this forum, history is constantly being rewritten; and when rewritten always contains the bias of the period. Currently the bias may include, nationalism, multiculturalism, racism and political correctness. eg: the latest on the Vikings and and Saxons is, they were not warlike warriors, pillagers and rapists, but were educated and family orientated people who did not drive the Celts into the West of England/Wales.

  • youngcornwall  |  March 12 2012, 1:50PM

    by Taxman100 "youngcornwall. Are you suggesting 1549,(462 years ago) may be considered to be, 'present times'? " No way do I wish to speak for the nats, they are more than capable of doing that for themselves, doing it outside their yes-men environment in the real world is another thing though. Take these few words below, what is one supposed to read into it, if it is not to be considered present times? STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! - …….What Genocide? They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide That England imposes ………………….Where When and Why? With smiles and Red Roses Where the innocents, so gullibly, reside……Are Cornish easily led then?

  • Taxman100  |  March 12 2012, 4:51PM

    youngcornwall. Point taken. For a moment there I thought you had changed sides and become one of the unmentionables. Are the Cornish easily led? No! At least not those like myself - and the misinformation coming from the direction of the nationalists is only fit for disposal in the wheelie bin! I must admit I have not heard about any genocide taking place in Cornwall, and if there was I am sure I would heard about it on the unbiased, multicultural, BBC News. England does not impose anything on we Cornishmen, as we are English too, and most of us are proud of the fact - perhaps, if the nationalists want to get elected they should remember that fact well. Sadly, the dear old unmentionables never received the level of press coverage they fully expected on St. Piran's Day - despite wearing their Tartan (circa 1985), talking in voices, and waving the flag - so I assume they now need another tale of the unexpected to unnerve the Cornish - Genocide!

  • youngcornwall  |  March 12 2012, 8:05PM

    by Taxman100 "youngcornwall. Point taken. For a moment there I thought you had changed sides and become one of the unmentionables." The only side I am interested in is the side of the truth, which is sometimes interpreted as being someone with a closed mind, far from it, quite the opposite in fact I am open to all, nothing would surprise me today, just look at the Catholic church and the goings on with their priests, who would have believed it was this bad a few years ago. So Nationalists if you have anything to say lets hear it, if not very good, so we can bring this to a close and put it down to being a figment of your imagination. Cornish Genocide and the Truth? What do you know or what do you care, do you have an opinion you would like to share?

  • Lafrowda  |  March 13 2012, 9:06AM

    When Augustine landed in England (AD 597) to seek the recognition of British Christians of Papal authority he found the most resistance to uniformity in the West. He wrote "Celtic Christianity would accept nothing outside of apostolic doctrine, denying the Pope's jurisdiction. The Celtic Christians refused to change or to accept the authority of the Pope. Eventually they did. The "genocide" that you mention was for an identical reason, the Cornish (and others) refused to change. The Prayer Book Rebellion of 1549 was really due to the Reformation, it was a return to the old paths not a new one. Eventually they did. Some by conviction and the majority as always because it was easiest.

  • Myghal  |  March 13 2012, 11:25AM

    Dear oh dear Taxman 100. I am not going to correct you on all you inaccuracies in one go because I don't have the time but in terms of publicity for Saint Piran's Day, you claim a lack of it! This very website has covered it for over a week; it featured in the Times (Of London) newspaper; on the BBC TV and the summarised reportage is still on the BBC website; on ITV; on BBC Radio Cornwall; on Pirate FM; on Atlantic FM; in each district edition of the West Briton (two full pages per edition)plus smaller articles; the Cornish Guardian; the Cornishman; in the Cornwall on line community newspaper; in every edition of the Packet newspaper; in at least two Irish National newspapers due to the Irish connection; shall I continue? The event was celebrated across Cornwall by literally thousands (there were two hundred at the gala dinner). As to individual overseas celebrations, I shall let you do that bit of research yourself, but you could try looking at the many websites hosted in Australia and the USA. Now, a little homework for you. Tartan and kilts. I am going to guess that you think the Scottish have worn it for hundreds and hundreds of years. Start by researching that point. You might be surprised. Further, check the tartan registry and you will find out when the latest tartans were registered and they were not in Cornwall. The Army have often hijacked flags, tartans and traditions particularly during the declining years of late during Regimental and Corps amalgamations. The RAF flag dates back to just after the first war. Nations which have formed during the last twenty years have adopted flags. Do try harder. Young Cornwall. I note that you have been stirring it up on Cornwall 24, this site's alter ego to which many posters on here seem rather addicted. Do your own research on the events during the late 1400's and early 1500's. You could start by reading 'Cornwall - a History' by Professor Phillip Payton (just to confirm and perhaps confuse you Taxman, he is an Officer of the Royal Naval Reserve). It is available in your library.

  • Slimslad  |  March 13 2012, 12:14PM

    "You could start by reading 'Cornwall - a History' by Professor Phillip Payton" For a totally unbiased viewpoint, of course?

  • Taxman100  |  March 13 2012, 12:16PM

    Mygal. I am aware St. Piran's Day was celebrated superbly well this year, and I took part myself! I did so because I am a Cornishman, although not a nationalist and do not speak in tongues. It's publicity was reasonable, but never-the-less was less than in previous years. No, I do not believe the Scots have worn kilts for many centuries. Indeed, my Regimental Tartan, which I was privileged to wear for about 32 years, is only about 290 years old. (Don't forget to account for the Dress Act of 1746). It wasn't stolen; its wearing was granted by the Duke (and his beautiful Lady) who formed the Regiment: as was the wearing of the Hunting and Dress. Some Military Tartans have changed due to amalgamations, but are based upon the original Tartans of the amalgamated Regiments. eg: The 4th Royal Regiment of Scotland (The Highlanders). Check the Scottish Tartan Society. Also worthy of note, wasn't it a clever little Jewish lad (of English origin) who brought colour to the drab Tartans? As for the Cornish Tartans, they came about as a PR stunt by the nationalists - historically, the Cornish never wore the Tartan. As for amalgamations in general, perhaps you should know our former County Regiment, the Duke of Cornwall's Light Infantry (now part of the Rifles) could easily have been called the Devonshire & Cornwall Light Infantry, as it was formed from Regimental elements within South Devon & Cornwall. I think you know my opinion about history - as confirmed by a well known Emeritus Professor of Ancient History. ie: The biggest liar in all of Christendom is history itself. Or, we write what we think people want to hear! (otherwise our books don't sell).

  • youngcornwall  |  March 13 2012, 3:48PM

    by Myghal "Young Cornwall. I note that you have been stirring it up on Cornwall 24," Is this so??? If you have nothing to contribute Myghal of your own without regurgitating from history books don't bother, incidentally this topic is about the here and now today, what do you know about any Genocide in Cornwall today? Don't comment any further about c24 nonsense because no one is bothered least of all myself. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! - …….What Genocide? They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide That England imposes ………………….Where When and Why? With smiles and Red Roses Where the innocents, so gullibly, reside……Are Cornish easily led then?

  • Big_Ger  |  March 15 2012, 8:44AM

    There has never been a "Cornish genocide", to claim that there has is a gross insult to the people who have witnessed real genocide around the world. Anyone claiming there has been a "Cornish genocide" is either delusional, lying, or a fool. What would someone hope to gain by spreading this lie?

  • Myghal  |  March 16 2012, 7:15PM

    Adhering strictly to YoungCornwall's request, I quote as follows: "Don't comment any further about c24 nonsense because no one is bothered least of all myself." (YoungCornwall) Bearing that posting in mind YoungCornwall, whence: "STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide" and so on please?

  • youngcornwall  |  March 16 2012, 7:50PM

    Myghal I was referring to this kind of innocence by Myghal "Young Cornwall. I note that you have been stirring it up on Cornwall 24," Get my meaning now? Seeing that I do not post on the forum you mentioned. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! - …….What Genocide? They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide That England imposes ………………….Where When and Why? With smiles and Red Roses Where the innocents, so gullibly, reside……Are Cornish easily led then?

  • youngcornwall  |  March 16 2012, 8:02PM

    Should read... Myghal I was referring to this kind of nonsense

  • Myghal  |  March 16 2012, 9:04PM

    YoungCornwall, I note that you do not post on the forum Cornwall 24 with 'all the nonsense on there'. To clarify, where did you find these words please?: STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide That England imposes etc.

  • youngcornwall  |  March 17 2012, 11:53AM

    by Myghal Tuesday, March 13 2012, 11:25AM "Young Cornwall. I note that you have been stirring it up on Cornwall 24," by Myghal Friday, March 16 2012, 9:04PM "YoungCornwall, I note that you do not post on the forum Cornwall 24" Where are we going with this Myghal? Or is this only to detract attention away from the topic? If not, do you have anything of use to add to this topic. by Myghal "To clarify, where did you find these words please?" Ok yes they were lifted from c24 as the link clearly indicates above. by youngcornwall Sunday, March 11 2012, 7:44PM STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! - They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide That England imposes With smiles and Red Roses Where the innocents, so gullibly, reside. http://tinyurl.com/6tyd6ed

  • Taxman100  |  March 17 2012, 12:05PM

    Mygahal. It just indicates youngcornwall reads his subjects in depth and considers the subject before making his conclusive comment here - which is highly admirable. It does not mean he posts on Cornwall 24. I read those highly inaccurate nationalist articles too!

  • Myghal  |  March 17 2012, 12:48PM

    Ah, so the words you quote are from Cornwall 24 forum where you say you do not post, Young Cornwall? A forum which you have said contains 'nonsense'? A forum from which, I believe, you were banned? Yet you choose to quote freely from one of the posters there and to try to make a discussion point of it here. Rather sad I feel and which reflects poorly on you. Perhaps if you feel that you need to air this Cornwall24 poster's 'strapline' here without much fear of disagreement, you should also take it up on Cornwall24? Or don't you have the wherewithal? A case of addiction perhaps? Meanwhile, feel free to look up the word 'genocide' on one of the many on line dictionaries and if, as has been suggested, you 'read your subjects in depth and consider it' perhaps you might like to record the definition on this forum.

  • Taxman100  |  March 17 2012, 2:56PM

    Myghal. You misquoted youngcornwall. I suggested what he may do is admirable. Definition, genocide: "the systematic killing of all the people from a national, ethnic, or religious group, or an attempt to do this". Please explain how the 'genocide of the Cornish' is being, or was being carried out, and by whom and when?

  • youngcornwall  |  March 17 2012, 4:34PM

    Thanks Taxman100 The nats truly have nothing to offer so it seems, I suppose there must be an element of embarrassment in the nats camp when they are faced with such straightforward questions, and no plausible answers to reply, Myghal did his best, whoever Myghal is out of this bunch. Nevertheless back to the topic and the search for the Truth, even at this late stage someone could come up with something, who knows, anyway the nats should be thanking me for raising this topic, instead of being so on the offensive. by youngcornwall Sunday, March 11 2012, 9:14AM "Far too long this has gone unsaid lets get together and put this to bed We have the internet now and everything at hand so why not join the nationalists and their happy band "

  • Myghal  |  March 17 2012, 5:55PM

    No embarrassment felt on my part YoungCornwall, merely a degree of pity for you who feels it necessary to borrow from a forum from which you were banned but can now rejoin and to make constant reference to it. I think the phrase is called 'get a life' isn't it? Now, genocide may be defined as: "The systematic and widespread extermination or attempted extermination of an entire national, racial, religious, or ethnic group." Some believe that is the current official policy in respect of the Cornish people, of which I am one, others do not believe such a thing. The fact that you skulk around Cornwall24 like some play yard child does you no credit. I believe I am correct in saying that the person who uses the phrase which has obviously excited you is convenor of an organisation called 'Tyr-Gwyr-Gweryn' (Land, Truth, People) which hales from the former 'Cowethas Flamank' organisation. The website maintained by Tyr-Gwyr-Gweryn and the relevant page concerning Cornish genocide may be found here: http://tinyurl.com/74sj42z This person may be contacted here: TGG@kernowtgg.co.uk Why not contact him direct with your views and questions or even post a question on Cornwall24? Perhaps you might draw from those sources the information you require rather than posting here in order to bathe in the reflected glory of your cronies?

  • Slimslad  |  March 17 2012, 6:20PM

    "Now, genocide may be defined as"? "May be defined"? By who?

  • youngcornwall  |  March 17 2012, 7:24PM

    Myghal. Shall we let the moderators of This forum be judge and jury what is acceptable or not for me to post, not you thank you very much. When something has been posted on the World Wide Web it is open to be used by anyone if they wish to do so, I am surprised you didn't know that. by youngcornwall Sunday, March 11 2012, 9:14AM We have the internet now and everything at hand so why not join the nationalists and their happy band " Lets see if we can move on if we can, Slimslad has posed a question for you I see.

  • Slimslad  |  March 17 2012, 8:27PM

    "Some believe that is the current official policy in respect of the Cornish people" Which "some"? Whose "official policy"?

  • Big_Ger  |  March 17 2012, 8:42PM

    Who composed the limerick you quote Young Cornwall, was it William McGonagle?

  • youngcornwall  |  March 18 2012, 9:08AM

    I am sure you mean this one Big_Ger and not the other masterpiece lol, the truth is I do not know who composed this one. The main concern is the content I would have thought, to think that someone believes in this stuff. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! - They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide That England imposes With smiles and Red Roses Where the innocents, so gullibly, reside.

  • Taxman100  |  March 18 2012, 4:17PM

    I have come to the conclusion those of the Cornish Nationalist persuasion simply argue, or attempt to denigrate others rather than debate any given subject. If Myghall believes in 'Cornish genocide' then he may do so, but never-the-less should be able to provide us with the relevant information to support the claims. I am Cornish, and I do not know of any Cornish genocide as suggested on the Tyr-Gwyr-Gweryn website. I suppose its just another myth & legend site - and it should be noted their connection to Cornwall24 is well known. What do the Nationalists hope to do by disseminating these false claims? Perhaps, they believe if they shout it loud and constantly repeat it someone will believe them - nobody with any intelligence and the ability to research at the highest level would ever succumb to their scribblings!

  • youngcornwall  |  March 18 2012, 5:45PM

    by Taxman100 "If Myghall believes in 'Cornish genocide' then he may do so, but never-the-less should be able to provide us with the relevant information to support the claims." How I see it Taxman. Some nats say there are two types of genocide, the one we know about, the blatant killing of people which is quick, and the one that is slow like a creeping paralysis, which happens virtually unnoticed, but the Cornish nats can see this going on in front of our very eyes in Cornwall today, while the rest of us cannot, the nats can see this, but won't talk about it on here, and I am not going to fight their fight for them, only to say it is very interesting indeed.

  • Slimslad  |  March 18 2012, 6:56PM

    Of all the definitions of genocide, TGG only ever chooses the Lemkin version. Typical of all nationalist "historical cherry-picking", Cornish or otherwise.

  • Myghal  |  March 18 2012, 7:11PM

    ""Now, genocide may be defined as"? "May be defined"? By who?" Answer: taken from the New English Dictionary on the shelf over my desk. I don't actually say whether I believe in Cornish Genocide or not, do I? In answer to all the other questions raised, perhaps the Anglocentric quorum here might care to lurk around the TGG organisation's website a bit as they do Cornwall24, a little like expelled school children skulking outside the school gates, and research their answers there. Why, one of you might even have the 'courage' to email the Convenor there and put your questions direct. I know he would be delighted to respond to you. Why, you could even post the responses here, couldn't you? I am certainly not doing your research for all three or four of you.

  • Slimslad  |  March 18 2012, 7:34PM

    "Answer: taken from the New English Dictionary on the shelf over my desk." Which states: "The deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group." The rest of Myghal's post has no bearing on the subject.

  • youngcornwall  |  March 18 2012, 7:54PM

    by Slimslad "The rest of Myghal's post has no bearing on the subject." Only to say he is comfortable sitting on the fence, until there is some backup available I suppose lol. Thanks for nothing Myghal. by Myghal "I don't actually say whether I believe in Cornish Genocide or not, do I?"

  • Myghal  |  March 18 2012, 8:16PM

    Back up, Mr Harvey? I hardly think so! You posed a question and I have given you a means to research it. I defer fully to the TGG website. Go on, lurk around TGG and gather courage and send and email with your points. After all, they are obviously important enough for you to raise amongst your sycophants here. Or better still, simply open an account on Cornwall24 and pose your question there. Go on, you know you want to. (is this where I write 'lol' ?)

  • youngcornwall  |  March 18 2012, 8:24PM

    Back to the Topic if we may please. "Cornish Genocide and the Truth? What do you know or what do you care, do you have an opinion you would like to share?"

  • Myghal  |  March 18 2012, 8:42PM

    So I take it that although you are happy to copy from Cornwall24, Mr Harvey, you can't be bothered to post your point on there nor to read fully the contents of TGG or to email its Convenor? So why ask your question here? Would you expect to find the answer here? How much are you really interested or are you indeed more keen to obtain 'brownie points' from amongst the Anglocentric quorum?

  • Big_Ger  |  March 18 2012, 9:38PM

    I'm glad myghal is back, he did immense damage to the Cornish nationalist case the last time he emerged from wherever he inhabits. Let's hope he does the same again.

  • Myghal  |  March 19 2012, 7:32AM

    I'm glad we have Big_Ger. A legend in his own imagination and excellent material for mockery in on line newspapers. Let's hope he continues his Anglocentric nonsense.

  • Big_Ger  |  March 19 2012, 8:49AM

    A perfect example of how Michael does the Cornish "nationalist' cause no good. What is "anglocentric" about anything I have ever said Mike? I don't expect an honest answer from you, you're incapable of it.

  • youngcornwall  |  March 19 2012, 9:11AM

    @ Big_Ger Believe this or not but this thread was started to get to the Truth, maybe throw a little more light on the subject, and see how some feel as they do, we have already ascertained that Myghal is on the fence and is only out to disrupt, we have not even touched on what MK the nationalist political party's take is on this Cornish genocide yet, it is a good chance they are being tarred with the same brush.

  • Slimslad  |  March 19 2012, 9:45AM

    Is that the Councillor back, under a different guise?

  • Taxman100  |  March 19 2012, 10:23AM

    Before this debate can continue, I think we need to define the word, 'Cornish'. Is it one who can trace their ancestry in Cornwall? Those who are born in Cornwall? Those who live in Cornwall? Or, is it those who decide to self-designate themselves as being, 'Cornish'. (As is permitted under European law?). Why is it so many of the supporters of Cornish Nationalism are either of Welsh or Scottish ancestry - particularly those who may or may not have moved to the county in recent times? It is particularly common amongst those who self-designate.

  • Myghal  |  March 19 2012, 11:55AM

    Big_Ger, you are such an insufferable bore. You dish out your pompous take on everything and think it counts. Well, you might impress your cronies at the Admiral but your reportage of every tiny development on the MK website is alike watching paint dry. Big_Ger, no body cares about your take on things. Slimslad, that I may have been a Councillor or might even be one now is of no concern to you. Taxman100, oh no. That boring old argument. What makes a Cornishman? Well what makes an Englishman? I happen to be Cornish by birth, ancestory and possession of the ginger gene. But if someone else chooses to self identify as such then why not? In Ireland, incomers are called the 'new Irish'. Unless in your vision of an ethnically pure England that is unacceptable... and also racist, of course. As it stands, all manner of people call themselves English even some Cornish deniers and the best of luck to them. The same applies to the other Nations of Great Britain. That is our right enshrined in European law. Now, here is a lot of information in answer to Mr Harvey's point: http://tinyurl.com/7dm2mxg and here is an email to ask questions: TGG@kernowtgg.co.uk Why don't the four of you gather all your 'courage' and read and ask any questions of TGG instead of forming a mutual appreciation society here?

  • youngcornwall  |  March 19 2012, 1:18PM

    by Myghal "Why don't the four of you gather all your 'courage' and read and ask any questions of TGG instead of forming a mutual appreciation society here?" TGG is no one particular, just someone who has a closed mind with his own web-site, with his own ideas and those regurgitated from books. This thread is about the here and now, showing people the Truth, what those in their midst are like, where both sides can come together and discuss things in a grown up manner. TGG cannot be all that convincing Myghal with the likes of you on the fence, perhaps if you let this thread unfold you might just have an opinion one way or the other, in the mean time lets hear what others may have to say about your TGG Guru and what he likes the world to read. "They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide That England imposes With smiles and Red Roses Where the innocents, so gullibly, reside."

  • Slimslad  |  March 19 2012, 1:55PM

    "possession of the ginger gene."? Ah, I think we can probably surmise just who this particular "Myghal" is.

  • Myghal  |  March 19 2012, 4:30PM

    I can surmise who the quorum are on here Slimslad. Between you all, you give plenty away here and elsewhere! Down to names and locations but so what? Are you making some kind of threat perhaps? Do blindfold games like sticking the tail on the donkey amuse you? I would surmise as much. Unlike you and the rest of the quorum here, I have no problem with English people being members of Nationalist Political Parties. Indeed, one of the Executive Officers of the SNP is English, a well known fact. And their are Asian members of many Nationalist Parties of the Nations of Britain. Meanwhile, here is a lot of information in answer to Mr Harvey's point: http://tinyurl.com/7dm2mxg and here is an email to ask questions: TGG@kernowtgg.co.uk Noting the constant quotes from that person's strapline on Cornwall24 copied and pasted here by not so young Cornwall, perhaps he would like to copy and paste some of the material from the TGG website.

  • Big_Ger  |  March 19 2012, 6:39PM

    I ask for an example of my "anglocentric" views, Michael is unable to give one. So he proves me right. As I said Mike; I don't expect an honest answer from you, you're incapable of it. So my point is proved. Mike is full of hot air, no wonder he is such a detriment to the cause! You couldn't make it up. :-)

  • youngcornwall  |  March 19 2012, 7:36PM

    @ Big_Ger Mike, Myghal or whatever name he is using at this particular time, he is just showing the readers and I am sure there are plenty of them, just how embarrassing this Cornish Genocide accusation really is, even Myghal himself has distanced himself from it, let's give a little credit where credit is due. by Myghal Sunday, March 18 2012, 7:11PM "I don't actually say whether I believe in Cornish Genocide or not, do I?" STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! - …….What Genocide? They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide That England imposes ………………….Where When and Why? With smiles and Red Roses Where the innocents, so gullibly, reside……Are Cornish easily led then?

  • Slimslad  |  March 19 2012, 8:14PM

    "Are you making some kind of threat perhaps?" Straight into attack mode, then "Myghal"? Insults as well. Still sitting on the fence on "Cornish genocide", it seems. Can't be seen to be attacking even extreme nationalists. Safer to insult those who disagree.

  • Big_Ger  |  March 19 2012, 10:03PM

    Thanks for the link to that TGG website Mike, I haven't stopped laughing yet!! Hysterical. If anyone wanted to put an end to the idea of nationalism that pile of gobbledegook would certainly be a big help, and I quote; To remove any ethnic consciousness over a short timescale is only possible by replacing it with nothing, i.e. death! Carried out over a long time period it is possible to replace one consciousness with another by using the appropriate mechanisms. Let us just reflect upon the known existence of a wartime tactical mechanism called 'brainwashing'; relate this to the winning of hearts and minds as a requirement of a particular political strategy and then control the rules in order to ensure that the strategy succeeds. Another way of looking at it - and an aid to understanding what is going on around us in Cornwall - is to think of a national identity as a people-territory relationship. Destroy that relationship in any way and you destroy the nation and its identity. Again, the function of time in the Cornish Case means that our relationship to Cornwall is being deliberately, and wilfully, fragmented and weakened and now being replaced with a new territorial focus, i.e. 'Devon & Cornwall', 'the two counties', 'Westcountry', 'Southwest', 'English' etc.

  • Taxman100  |  March 20 2012, 11:36AM

    Mygal. I am quite certain you understand a subject cannot be debated in a satisfactory manner unless the primary question is clear. In this case, quantifying the definition of 'Cornish' is essential. That then becomes the start point for any further research or debate. I have no problem with someone self-designating themselves as Cornish, providing they are, or have been, resident within the County for some period of time. Despite considerable research by myself and others in their specialist field I cannot locate any information relating to 'the Cornish ginger gene' - it is an interesting point of view, and perhaps you would let me know where the related information originated from.

  • youngcornwall  |  March 20 2012, 1:22PM

    by Myghal Saturday, March 17 2012, 5:55PM "No embarrassment felt on my part YoungCornwall, merely a degree of pity for you who feels it necessary to borrow from a forum from which you were banned but can now rejoin and to make constant reference to it." Not "borrow" Myghal Expose more like. Exposing the incitement to hatred, how else is this poem of TGG and those who agree with it to be interpreted? If not to encourage unrest among people. No way on this forum or any other decent forum would it see the light of day if it were being used to promote such things? Yes I was banned from c24 is that surprising? My God if I was not, I could not live with myself, and I am not on my own I am sure. Here it is again Myghal, get off the fence and break the chains what the nationalists are preaching. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! - They declare their Cornishness with pride Whilst oblivious to our genocide That England imposes With smiles and Red Roses Where the innocents, so gullibly, reside.

  • Big_Ger  |  March 21 2012, 9:18AM

    (1) They declare their Cornishness with pride (2) Whilst oblivious to our genocide (3) That England imposes (4) With smiles and Red Roses (5) Where the innocents, so gullibly, reside. Line (1), someone is declaring their Cornishness with pride. Who? I though the nutty nationalists were keen on people declaring their Cornishness. Line (2) So someone (who?) declaring their Cornishness, is oblivious (unmindful; unconscious; unaware) of our (whose?) "genocide" (the policy of deliberately killing a nationality or ethnic group ) not much they can do about that then! Though rather, seeing as it's "our (possessive case) genocide", it sounds as if the author, and chums, are the ones committing genocide, which is nasty of them. Line (3) Apparently the whole of the country of England, of which Cornwall is a part, is 'imposing" this "genocide" which is a rather weak expression for something so profound,. Line (4) and apparently they are doing it with a smile, good customer service that! Oh, and they are throwing in a free red rose, as a token of love perhaps? Line (5) where the "innocent" (free from moral wrong; without sin; pure), so "gullibly" (easily deceived or cheated,) reside (to dwell permanently or for a considerable time.) Ok, I'll take a stab at this gibberish; I'm guessing it means; "where not guilty fools permanently live." OK, from the top; "I'm Cornish and proud of it I don't know anything about this alleged killing of a national group. That the English are pushing on someone. With good customer service and a free rose. Apparently it's going on in a place where people who are not guilty permanently live." I'm taking it this has something to do with the website full of gibberish Mike linked too. That would make a lot of sense, but it's still nonsense..

  • poldice  |  March 22 2012, 1:35PM

    Remember and be aware but never ever look back because given goodwill and tolerance a bright future beckons us. The wellfare of Kernow is constantly compromised by armchair warriors from both camps of the Kernewick divide who have irreconcilable opinions in the former manner of Ulstermen. Even the supposedly intractible Ulstermen have built bridges and advanced while we in Kernow are forced to witness this lot. Better you all get off your butts and get to work to capitalise on the natural and cultural bounty that we Cornish are blessed with so that the best may be enjoyed cherished and handed intact to our children and our childrens children for them to judge in their turn. Remember we are but custodians and collectively we are presently making a pretty poor job of our role of stewardship. Bitterness and rancour are both corrosive and divisive, those that indulge in these sins whatever view they represent should hang their heads in shame because their are two sides to every story.

  • Big_Ger  |  March 22 2012, 8:14PM
  • KernowGB  |  March 26 2012, 8:49PM

    Cornish Genocide and the Truth? What do you know or what do you care, do you have an opinion you would like to share?" by youngcornwall - Monday, March 12 2012, 8:05PM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think you know my opinion about history - as confirmed by a well known Emeritus Professor of Ancient History. ie: The biggest liar in all of Christendom is history itself. Or, we write what we think people want to hear! (otherwise our books don't sell). by Taxman100 - Tuesday, March 13 2012, 12:16PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The two items quoted above throw an interesting perspective into the arena of this topic. The first one looks for "the Truth" and ask for peoples 'opinions' irrespective of whether they 'know' or 'care'. The second one confuses history with the way that it is interpreted and written about by those who wish to sell books. So no source of such information can be trusted. How can anyone ever know what is the truth? This means that the only way to learn the truth is to do one's own primary research. Something sadly lacking in this thread, despite many pointers of where to look, with not even a legitimate understanding of 'genocide' itself, save quoting from the not-unbiased official sources.

  • Slimslad  |  March 27 2012, 7:52AM

    Or just using the source that "fits". In the neo-Celtic case. Lemkin.

  • KernowGB  |  March 27 2012, 9:17AM

    Please explain what that 'one-liner' insinuation means in practice? Since, you mention "Lemkin", without explanation, it is only necessary to point out that it is, in fact, the ultimate primary source reference, by the very person that 'defined genocide' and is, therefore, appropriate to ALL cases.

  • Slimslad  |  March 27 2012, 10:30AM

    Excuse me, parts of Lemkin's definition that "fits" the Neo-Celtic case.

  • KernowGB  |  March 27 2012, 11:11AM

    by Slimslad - Tuesday, March 27 2012, 10:30AM "Excuse me, parts of Lemkin's definition that "fits" the Neo-Celtic case." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for that. That will do nicely! Everyone please note precisely what Slimslad said, and meant. Lemkin's definition (for everyone's consumption and edification) contained in his "Axis Rule in Occupied Europe" (1944) was: "Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups. Genocide is directed against the national group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in their individual capacity, but as members of the national group." "Genocide has two phases: one, destruction of the national pattern of the oppressed group; the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor. This imposition, in turn, may be made upon the oppressed population which is allowed to remain or upon the territory alone, after removal of the population and the colonization by the oppressor's own nationals." [Achieved by a number of "Techniques" listed as]: · Political · Social · Cultural · Economic · Biological · Physical: ······ Endangering Health ······ Mass Killing · Religious · Moral

  • Taxman100  |  March 27 2012, 11:29AM

    I still maintain one cannot debate, 'Cornish genocide', unless 'Cornish' can be clearly defined - else we do not know to whom the genocide is supposedly applicable. If Cornish refers to those strictly of Cornish origin, then I do not see how, or why, the UN CPPCG of 1948 is applicable - and I say that as Cornishman, born, bred and with a traceable ancestry of a number of centuries.

  • KernowGB  |  March 27 2012, 12:42PM

    by Taxman100 - Monday, March 12 2012, 4:51PM "youngcornwall. Point taken. For a moment there I thought you had changed sides and become one of the unmentionables. Are the Cornish easily led? No! At least not those like myself - and the misinformation coming from the direction of the nationalists is only fit for disposal in the wheelie bin! I must admit I have not heard about any genocide taking place in Cornwall, and if there was I am sure I would heard about it on the unbiased, multicultural, BBC News. England does not impose anything on we Cornishmen, as we are English too, and most of us are proud of the fact - perhaps, if the nationalists want to get elected they should remember that fact well. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The best example of the existence of a process of Cornish genocide is contained in the above quote from your earlier post. The Cornish existed on this island long before the existence of the word 'English' or 'England'. Nevertheless, genocide is applied to 'groups' that self-identify as, for example, 'Cornish' . It is a territorial epithet having a very long history - in fact a unique history - within which, and to which, others, over time would/will assimilate given the respect and rights that should inalienably be theirs. Who could unambiguously define an English person today? Cornwall is a nation, in the same way that England, Scotland and Wales are nations. Yet any attempt to destroy these groups would still be categorised as genocide. I do not understand what it is that you are implying with your second para or its link to the 1948 Convention?

  • Slimslad  |  March 27 2012, 2:26PM

    "I do not understand what it is that you are implying with your second para or its link to the 1948 Convention?" I think Taxman may be referring to the actual U.N. document on genocide, and not Lemkin's idea of how it should read. http://tinyurl.com/cqsmtun

  • KernowGB  |  March 27 2012, 3:25PM

    by Slimslad - Tuesday, March 27 2012, 2:26PM I think Taxman may be referring to the actual U.N. document on genocide, and not Lemkin's idea of how it should read. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I feel sure that Taxman will feel comfortable in explaining his own point, but it seems a bit disengenuous, and insulting, for anyone to dismiss someone's lifetime study and observation of genocide, which served to make it the subject of International Law, as 'an idea'. The 1948 Convention is a very narrow part of the full scope of 'genocide' and is not something that I am discussing, nor is it relevant to this topic.

  • Slimslad  |  March 27 2012, 4:18PM

    "The 1948 Convention is a very narrow part of the full scope of 'genocide' and is not something that I am discussing, nor is it relevant to this topic." "narrow"? The 1948 Convention was the basis on which genocide was seen under international law. But I can see why you wouldn't want to discuss it.

  • KernowGB  |  March 27 2012, 5:10PM

    Yes! Narrow! Irrelevant! Not sure what it is about what I said that you do not understand, or the reason I gave for not discussing it, but perhaps this link will help?; http://tinyurl.com/bm9qvlz

  • youngcornwall  |  March 27 2012, 5:38PM

    Cutting through all this Tomfoolery, what has Genocide got to do with Cornwall today? Moreover what has it got to do with the people of Cornwall today?

  • Myghal  |  March 27 2012, 6:00PM

    You set the question and encouraged the postings youngcornwall but you now dismiss this as 'tomfoolery' which leads me to wonder why you asked the question in the first place. What were your motives for doing so? KernowGB is answering in a most sober manner the points, yet you now dismiss this as tomfoolery. Meanwhile I see on another thread you question whether Cornish individuality is being eroded. What is your agenda? To gain points amongst your internet buddies perhaps?

  • youngcornwall  |  March 27 2012, 7:39PM

    At this moment in time this thread seems to be going around in circles and getting nowhere fast, so moving on if it is possible and…"Cutting through all this Tomfoolery, what has Genocide got to do with Cornwall today? Moreover what has it got to do with the people of Cornwall today?"

  • Slimslad  |  March 27 2012, 7:49PM

    Nothing at all.

  • KernowGB  |  March 27 2012, 8:26PM

    Before you can understand the answer to your secondary question - if truth is what you are after? - it is crucial that you fully understand what genocide is and how it may be achieved. There is no indication that any of you have even conceded the fact that genocide can exist outside of the terms of the 1948 Convention. Attempting now to reach a presumed 'bottom line' without that essential knowledge is about as pointless as any discussion can get. Where are the indicators that suggest that it is going around in circles? There has not even been any meaningful responses/discussion from any of you supposed truth-seekers' to any of the comments that I have posted. Let me post a couple of items extracted from the Carnegie website that I posted earlier. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote 1 - Cultural genocide ultimately was excluded from the final Convention, except for a limited prohibition on the forcible transfer of a group's children. The drafters acknowledged that the removal of children was physically and biologically destructive but further recognized that indoctrinating children into the customs,language, and values of a foreign group was "tantamount to the destruction of the [child's] group, whose future depended on that next generation." Despite the limited definition of the offense itself, broader cultural considerations do still play two important roles in prosecuting genocide under the Convention. First, acts of cultural genocide—conduct violating what the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) referred to as the "very foundation of the group"—tend to establish the genocidist's specific intent to destroy the protected group. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote 2 - Cultural genocide thus plays a subsidiary role in our present understanding of genocide and group destruction. But this is a product of the political realities of treaty negotiation between states rather than any limitation inherent in the concept. The Convention's drafters acknowledged the legitimacy of cultural genocide, and indicated that it might be addressed through other international instruments. Indeed, an individual right to cultural existence was recognized in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and subsequently affirmed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. And to accommodate the erosion of traditional geographic and economic boundaries, more recent treaties such as the Charter of the European Union and the Council of Europe's Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities contain anti-assimilation language and create express obligations to respect cultural diversity. Culture also is protected through such specific-purpose instruments as the European Cultural Convention and the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Both quotes contain 'active' links within the Carnegie website.

  • Slimslad  |  March 27 2012, 8:35PM

    All just "smoke and mirrors" to hide the fact that none of the examples quoted were included in the U.N. decision on the meaning of "genocide". Nothing whatsoever to do with Cornwall, past or present.

  • Gwynnhadu  |  March 27 2012, 9:05PM

    Interesting material and highly relevant to what has been happening in the Duchy. Slimslad, I believe if you were told the moon were made of dust and minerals you would dismiss all the evidence by saying it is of green cheese. You are truly outclassed here by someone who appears to know their subject.

  • Gwynnhadu  |  March 27 2012, 9:13PM

    A useful short film to clarify perhaps? http://tinyurl.com/c77gufj

  • Slimslad  |  March 27 2012, 10:17PM

    "You are truly outclassed here by someone who appears to know their subject." I am crushed.

  • Gurnards_Head  |  March 27 2012, 10:24PM

    AND THEY TRIED TO TELL ME ST MICHAEL WAS THE PATRON SAINT OF SHOPPERS!!!

  • KernowGB  |  March 27 2012, 10:37PM

    by Slimslad - Tuesday, March 27 2012, 8:35PM "All just "smoke and mirrors" to hide the fact that none of the examples quoted were included in the U.N. decision on the meaning of "genocide". Nothing whatsoever to do with Cornwall, past or present." -------------------------------------------------------------------- Your post simply does not make any sense. How can it be "smoke & mirrors"? What is being said is 'open' and 'transparent' for those with the wit to comprehend what is the difference between the internationally recognised narrow limitations of the 1948 Convention and the broder scope of genocide defined by Lemkin. How can you say that it is nothing to do with Cornwall 'past' or 'present', since you do not even comprehend (wittingly or unwittingly) what genocide is. Despite what has been placed in front of you. When, I wonder, will Young Cornwall accuse you specifically of deliberately generating a circular argument?

  • Slimslad  |  March 28 2012, 8:28AM

    The difference between the internationally recognised narrow limitations of the 1948 Convention and the broder.,(sic), scope of genocide defined by Lemkin. "The difference" is,(as you admit),one is "internationally recognised". The other being the interpretation of genocide by one man, "narrow limitations", indeed.

  • youngcornwall  |  March 28 2012, 9:19AM

    by Slimslad "Nothing whatsoever to do with Cornwall, past or present." It appears it is in the interest of some Cornish nats to cling on to this "genocide" straw, in their endeavours to attract attention, playing the hard done by poor is me Cornish card, thinking this will gain them some kind of sympathy support.

  • Big_Ger  |  March 28 2012, 10:16AM

    Lemkin's broader concerns over genocide, as set out in his "Axis Rule in Occupied Europe", also embraced what may be considered as non-physical, namely, psychological acts of genocide which he personally defined as: "Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups. Genocide is directed against the national group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in their individual capacity, but as members of the national group." So how does that apply to Cornwall. Any takers?

  • KernowGB  |  March 28 2012, 11:19AM

    Truly pathetic! Not enough intellect, intelligence or integrity to even muster up a proper discussion from any of you. Enough has been said by me for others to judge you on what little you have been able to contribute to your own thread topic and its pretentious agenda. An agenda, which asks questions for which you are not even interested in the answers or the backround for those answers. You certainly have no valid response, nor understanding, of what has been put before you. For anyone truly interested, most of the answers have been on Cornwall24 for a very long time. Given your responses, above, then you clearly are worrying about something for the sake of self-indulgent self-interest. Time, I would suggest, that you start thinking about getting a life.

  • Slimslad  |  March 28 2012, 12:19PM

    "Truly pathetic!" "Not enough intellect, intelligence or integrity". "pretentious agenda." "You certainly have no valid response, nor understanding" "self-indulgent self-interest." "start thinking about getting a life." A fairly typical set of responses, in my opinion. Perhaps the gentleman is more used to the gentle, unchallenging, debate of C24?

  • youngcornwall  |  March 28 2012, 2:35PM

    85 man alive! That many replies to this thread not bad is it. Realistically though are we any further forward? Who in their right mind would take this "Genocide" myth seriously? What is to be gained from it? Other than making the Cornish look silly. "Cornish Genocide and the Truth? What do you know or what do you care, do you have an opinion you would like to share?"

  • KernowGB  |  March 28 2012, 2:54PM

    Clearly Slimslad is delusional, if he considers the actions of 'the quartet' as being some form of challenge. The one that started the thread is obviously only interested in repeating his personal mantra, and has the temerity to query the progress of the topic? Time, of course, will be the ultimate judge - as always.

  • KernowGB  |  March 28 2012, 4:43PM

    Just thought that I would leave you with a couple more links. Not because they will mean anything to 'the Four', but for the benefit of others that may be passing through with an open mind. The first relates to a Press Release, in March 2010, by Thomas Hammarberg , the Human Rights Commissioner of the Council of Europe (not the EU), which I feel sure, we would all support. https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=PR238%282010%29&Language=lanEnglish&Ver=original&Site=COE&BackColorInternet=DBDCF2&BackColorIntranet=FDC864&BackColorLogged=FDC864 Having made a claim in favour of Cornwall24, and Slimslad's delusional comment in response: The second, points to a discussion on Cornwall24, which is worthy of comparison with what has gone before in this topic, namely: http://tinyurl.com/d8kayd9

  • KernowGB  |  March 28 2012, 4:45PM

    Hopefully, this is a better link to the COE document? https://wcd.coe.int//ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=PR238%282010%29&Language=lanEngl

  • KernowGB  |  March 28 2012, 4:48PM

    Either cut and paste the previous long link, or do the same with the shorter link, but do not include the closing quote marks

  • Slimslad  |  March 28 2012, 6:16PM

    Twice I am "delusional". What an honour. But, at least I can say,(even in my "bi-delusional" condition), my links work.

  • Big_Ger  |  March 28 2012, 9:36PM

    Wow, four posts on the trot from KernowBG, and yet he refuses to debate. Something must havce rattled him. Fact: there is no Cornish genocide. There is no disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals. End of story.

  • JoyRedruth  |  March 28 2012, 10:27PM

    No but there is clear evvidence that we are treated like second class citizens here in Cornwall from London. Time for a bit of home rule and Osborne may have bit off a bit more than he can chew this time! The beggar has loaded a gun that is about to go off!

  • JoyRedruth  |  March 28 2012, 10:28PM

    No but there is clear evvidence that we are treated like second class citizens here in Cornwall from London. Time for a bit of home rule and Osborne may have bit off a bit more than he can chew this time! The beggar has loaded a gun that is about to go off!

  • KernowGB  |  March 28 2012, 11:39PM

    by Big_Ger - Wednesday, March 28 2012, 9:36PM "Wow, four posts on the trot from KernowBG, and yet he refuses to debate. Something must havce rattled him. Fact: there is no Cornish genocide. There is no disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals. End of story." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Rather a hypocritical observation, given all the information and comment that I have placed on this thread over the past two day, for which nobody has picked up on anything that I have said - other than ad nauseum restating their own narrow perspective of a topic that they know absolutely nothing about, nor any indication that they even wish to improve their minds on the subject. Despite having told them where the answers to their questions might be found. I have been in this business for too long to ever get rattled, because one thing that I have learnt over many decades is that 'the truth will out'. The only reason, in point of fact, why 'the four' are obsessed with maintaining such a discussion on a topic which they say repeatedly does not exist. They know it exists and their very partisan obsession with it proves it, as I indicated in my opening post two days ago. Having made the above observation, one would have expected, its author, to provide at least some tangible proof that the issues he quotes do not exist. But why stop with discussing just an extract from a much larger list. make it inclusive of all things that the Cornish are not being denied. Would any of them, as self-confessed Englishmen, know what they are anyway? He/they say no genocide, but they cannot prove it. I say 'yes' genocide and can prove it. However, they have not yet passed key stage 1 of the learning process.

  • Slimslad  |  March 29 2012, 7:42AM

    I have read all KernowGB's evidence carefully. But, unfortunately, all that ever stands out, (for me anyway),are the insults and the insinuations that the gentleman is far more intelligent than those that challenge his views. For example: "However, they have not yet passed key stage 1 of the learning process."

  • youngcornwall  |  March 29 2012, 9:34AM

    by KernowGB "I have been in this business for too long to ever get rattled, because one thing that I have learnt over many decades is that 'the truth will out'." Perhaps a new approach is needed? Your inability to get over the truth as you see it is coming over as frustration on your part. I have the impression you are being restricted in what you would really like to put into print, for fear of making a bigger fool of yourself or going that little bit too far maybe.

  • Taxman100  |  March 29 2012, 9:35AM

    I am inclined to agree with Slimslad. KernowGB comes across as being arrogant in the extreme. Particularly, when he suggests, "others have not yet passed key stage 1 of the learning process". I wonder what miraculous stage(s) he has passed - I think he should let us know. As far as the Cornish genocide is concerned I cannot, no matter which definition is used, find any logical reason for the comment, Cornish genocide'. As I Cornishman myself, I am not deprived of anything, including my culture (the true Cornish culture) - and am certainly not deprived politically by the UK Government. Perhaps, the likes of KernowGB would like to set up their own political party; which is of course an option open to any group or individual within the UK. Finally, as I have repeatedly said, unless, 'Cornish' can be defined then there can be no debate as we do not know to whom the 'genocide' is supposedly applicable - and, that statement is legally correct, and accepted by all (UK, EU & UN).

  • Big_Ger  |  March 29 2012, 10:39AM

    Evidence of the disintegration of the political and social institutions? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration of culture? Nil? Cornish culture is thriving. Evidence of the disintegration of the Cornish language? Nil, The Cornish langauge wis wells upported by Govt. Evidence of the disintegration of Cornish national feelings? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration of the Cornish religion? Nil, no such thing. Evidence of the disintegration and the economic existence of teh Cornish national groups? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of the personal security? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of Cornish liberty? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of Cornish health? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of Cornish dignity? Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of the lives of the Cornish people? Nil. Evidence of the Cornish genocide? Nil.

  • KernowGB  |  March 29 2012, 11:20AM

    An interesting misquote there by Taxman, where 'they' suddenly becomes 'others'. You are as entitled to hold whatever opinion of me that you wish, as I am of your goodselves. There is no reason to change 'the approach', because it is a subject that can only progress as quickly as the public's "genuine understanding of the subject", and "the public will", will allow. The narrow UN definition has been under the microscope of the international community for a long time and, as one of the links that I gave illustrates, there are many other Treaties and Conventions seeking to redress that UN limitation. The most significant for Cornwall would be the Council of Europe's "Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities" (FCNM), under which protections the UK Government has refused the Cornish. The more that the concept of Cornish genocide is denied, by those that fail to be objective over the issues, the more it will become a focus of the more open and enquiring minds. It would, nevertheless be interesting to hear what Taxman's view of "the true Cornish Culture" is, including the reason that he felt that he had to qualify it the way he does?

  • youngcornwall  |  March 29 2012, 12:34PM

    by KernowGB "It would, nevertheless be interesting to hear what Taxman's view of "the true Cornish Culture" is, including the reason that he felt that he had to qualify it the way he does?" Well start a new thread, this thread is about Genocide. Thank you B_G what more is there to say. "Evidence of the disintegration of the political and social institutions? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration of culture? Nil? Cornish culture is thriving. Evidence of the disintegration of the Cornish language? Nil, The Cornish langauge wis wells upported by Govt. Evidence of the disintegration of Cornish national feelings? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration of the Cornish religion? Nil, no such thing. Evidence of the disintegration and the economic existence of teh Cornish national groups? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of the personal security? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of Cornish liberty? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of Cornish health? Nil. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of Cornish dignity? Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of the lives of the Cornish people? Nil. Evidence of the Cornish genocide? Nil."

  • Taxman100  |  March 29 2012, 5:22PM

    youngcornwall. Absolutely correct. You saved me a lot of keyboard work. Cornish Nationalists always hope someone, anyone, (particularly their friends in the undemocratic EU) will change the rules by which each and everyone else has to live. If they cannot define, 'Cornish', then there can be no case to answer in respect of 'Cornish genocide'. Put another way, according to their claim, genocide is being committed against the 'Cornish', yet they are unable to clarify who, precisely, the 'Cornish' are. I can but assume they would suggest I am not Cornish enough, as I disagree with them, profoundly! Maybe that is the point; one can only be categorised as being 'Cornish' if you agree entirely with their unqualified definition? Now, where have I heard that sort of language before? I know where it was - a building off the Rue de la Loi, Brussels, which I frequently visit!

  • KernowGB  |  March 29 2012, 5:57PM

    by youngcornwall Thursday, March 29 2012, 12:34PM "by KernowGB "It would, nevertheless be interesting to hear what Taxman's view of "the true Cornish Culture" is, including the reason that he felt that he had to qualify it the way he does?" Well start a new thread, this thread is about Genocide. ----------------------------------------------------------------- KGB - Since it is a point very relevant to this topic, why should it need a new topic? How will others judge whether there has been any change (good or bad) to provide a marker for the existence, or not, of genocide? I have broken down the B_G comments that you quote and added a KGB comment to each Thank you B_G what more is there to say. KGB - A bit subjective, since you have not yet reached the point of truth that others might think you were looking for. His list, but for the addition of several "Nil" comments is only what he has already said in his post of Wednesday, March 28 2012, 9:36PM with an occasional added comment that defies comparison. "Evidence of the disintegration of the political and social institutions? Nil. KGB - This view cannot be substantiated, because from the latter part of the 19th century, Cornwall had the status of English county imposed upon it. This changed the whole dynamic of the Duchy in a way that interfered with its natural progression as a distinct region of Britain Evidence of the disintegration of culture? Nil? Cornish culture is thriving. KGB - This again, cannot be substantiated, because a similar process to the previous comment found the implementation of a standard education system, which whilst concentrating on the 3 Rs, also inculcated into young (and old) minds the 19th century concept of Empire with its hegemonic agenda of Britain = England and reinforceing the concept of England and English county into gullible minds. If Cornish culture is thriving, can you explain how, why, when, this phenomenon changed direction? Evidence of the disintegration of the Cornish language? Nil, The Cornish langauge wis wells upported by Govt. KGB - A case of short memory with this one. The language went into decline because of the actions of an English king, in the 16th century. Whilst the language has been revived by linguistic activists, and currently recognised by the Government, it is only possible to say that it is 'supported' by the Government. Compared to other comparable groups, it is very poorly supported. Evidence of the disintegration of Cornish national feelings? Nil. KGB - So that is a concession, by 'the four' that you are proud of your Cornish national identity, which you recorded in the 2011 Census? Yes? Evidence of the disintegration of the Cornish religion? Nil, no such thing. KGB - Some might argue with that, but I am not qualified to speak on such matters, other than to point to the socio-politico-cultural effect of the existence of the Church of England, within the Duchy in undermining Cornish aspirations. I understand that Methodism was a reaction to that, but others, perhaps, may offer some response? Evidence of the disintegration and the economic existence of teh Cornish national groups? Nil. KGB - The current status of Cornwall as one of the poorest places in Europe, seriously undermines that 'opinion' as does the removal of many of the Utilities and Commercial institutions that served to give employment opportunities and better wages within the Duchy. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of the personal security? Nil. KGB - Try arguing a pro-Cornish point of view and see where that gets you. Particularly in view of a recent anti-Cornish Facebook Campaign.

  • KernowGB  |  March 29 2012, 5:57PM

    Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of Cornish liberty? Nil. KGB - Refusal, by the Government to recognise 'the Cornish' under the protections implicit in the Council of Europe's "Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities" in line with its recognition and support for the Cornish Language under the protections of the Council of Europe's "European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages" is an example of where the State is a culpable partner in the process of Cornish genocide, because we are placed in the position that the State, and as a consequence, the people have no statutory requirement to respect or acknowledge that the Cornish have specific needs and rights. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of Cornish health? Nil. KGB - I have no qualification to speak on health, but it has never been said that all the "Techniques" are applicable to the Cornish Case. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of Cornish dignity? KGB - A number of the above items will certainly have a very negative effect upon how the Cornish will feel about themselves, or their willingness to defend themselves, and identity against 'outsiders'. The stigma during the 20th century was palpable. Evidence of the disintegration and the destruction of the lives of the Cornish people? Nil. KGB - Because the Cornish have been made statistically invisible, this cannot be quantified. That situation, due to pressure to be able to do so, is slowly changing. I would commend the publication "Cornwall at the Crossroads", published in 1988 by the Cornish Social and Economic Research Group as an indicator of a problem that still is not being addressed. A real can of worms. Evidence of the Cornish genocide? Nil." KGB - Again, an ill-considered, comment., which I shall give just an indication now of classic acts of culpability. The State lies about the true constitutional position of Cornwall as a Royal Duchy and not and English county, which instantly devalues the postion and rights of the Cornish nation within the island and beyond. The failure to include any aspect of 'Cornish' subjects within the school curriculum, which may be construed as "forced assimilation" of Cornish children that should represent the continuation of the Cornish nation. The propaganda use of "English" national symbolism with the Duchy both political, social and commercial. The consistent attacks on the integity of the Cornish national border with England. The unnacceptable population growth within the Duchy, which serves to marginalise the Cornish people and Cornish culture. I could go on, but will leave it there for now.

  • Slimslad  |  March 29 2012, 7:04PM

    The most telling phrase, (for me). "It has never been said that all the "Techniques" are applicable to the Cornish Case." Of the 12 "Techniques", quoted by Big_Ger. KernowGB answered on five.

  • KernowGB  |  March 29 2012, 8:01PM

    I think that that comment fully indicates the absolute subjectivity given to the topic. Please get your facts and terminology right before engaging brain, or explain wht you mean..

  • KernowGB  |  March 29 2012, 8:20PM

    I must just add that the above responses are merely a 'glimpse' into the issues that have a bearing on the existence of Cornish genocide and, which could be conserably further enlarged by more specific details surrounding each. One crucial fact to remember is that the process is renewed every time there is a new accession to the Crown and/or the position of Duke of Cornwall, because both parties are well aware of what is being done to the Cornish people. The State is merely an agency that institutionalises the process, which is further driven by an inertia of the people's deliberately skewed perceptions.

  • Slimslad  |  March 29 2012, 9:22PM

    I think your comments and responses give more than a "glimpse" of your mind-set on the subject, and your attitude to those that challenge, object, or reject your opinions on the subject. At the end of the day that is all they are, your personal opinions.

  • youngcornwall  |  March 30 2012, 9:05AM

    "One crucial fact to remember is that the process is renewed every time there is a new accession to the Crown and/or the position of Duke of Cornwall, because both parties are well aware of what is being done to the Cornish people." And the majority of "the Cornish people" have a very good life so it seems, thank you very much, and are not deprived in anyway without the knowledge of the genocide propaganda tactics that is being spouted about. "what is being done to the Cornish people"??? Poor little lambs. LOL

  • Taxman100  |  March 30 2012, 9:35AM

    Slimslad, youngcornwall. I have to agree with you, it is quite simply a personal mind set, and is one which has been shown to be common amongst extreme nationalists throughout the globe. It also has a relationship to an individuals general psychology. ie: they must always be right and dominant: even in contradiction of the facts. In their world exaggeration is the norm and myth creates a false reality - anything which supports their cause, whether right or wrong, is grasped upon eagerly and exaggerated further in support their self-held position. I have also concluded, they perceive themselves as being the only 'true Cornish'. ie: They see themselves as the 'Cornish' they constantly refer to - in reality nothing could be further from the truth.

  • KernowGB  |  March 30 2012, 11:17AM

    I believe that those comments, just about wrap up the exposure of your limited agenda, with enough information for others to pursue their own lines of enquiry. I feel sure that they will be well aware that at no time have any of you entered seriously into a search for 'The Truth' of a subject that parallels the worst kind of evil that one group can perpetrate against another - its destruction. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE!

  • Slimslad  |  March 30 2012, 1:19PM
  • KernowGB  |  March 30 2012, 3:46PM

    You may find this link helpful. Unfortunately it looks like one of those that does not convert properly: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:NJ3RBBijED8J:http://tinyurl.com/ctmpx4e If it does not convert, then please copy and paste it into your browser to see its contents in full. I copy its opening statement below, so that you may have some indication of what it is about. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Nikos A. Salingaros Cognitive Dissonance and Non-adaptive Architecture: Seven Tactics for Denying the Truth. Human physiology can lead people who have acquired false beliefs to stubbornly persist in holding them. Intelligent persons conform to irrational groupthink, employing a stock of tools to fight against any idea that conflicts with those already held. There is in fact a built-in resistance to new ideas that do not conform to accepted practices, even when such practices are demonstrated to be failures. We can understand this resistance to change within the framework of social learning and evolutionary adaptation. "Cognitive dissonance" is a state of physical anxiety to which we instinctively react in a defensive manner. We are programmed to counteract its occurrence. Studies in political science and psychology reveal strong innate mechanisms for preserving misinformation so as to avoid cognitive dissonance. Methods of handling contradictory information within settings requiring urgent action — while obviously appropriate at the evolutionary level of early humans — wreak havoc with our present-day rationality. --------------------------------------------------------------- You might be more familiar with this phenomenon in moving from de facto to belief (the Santa Zone) to eventual knowledge, when a child. Enjoy!

  • KernowGB  |  March 30 2012, 3:49PM

    D & B. Try this one: http://tinyurl.com/c43u2qt Same document, different site.

  • Slimslad  |  March 30 2012, 7:29PM

    Well done, KernowGB! Found Tiny.

  • KernowGB  |  March 30 2012, 8:37PM

    Not guilty, but it is Interesting to note that you have not even been able to work out that it is this website that finds 'tiny'...... or not. :-))

  • Slimslad  |  March 30 2012, 9:06PM

    Oh..Yes..

  • Slimslad  |  March 30 2012, 9:07PM

    Love the Nikos stuff, by the way.

  • Big_Ger  |  March 30 2012, 10:27PM

    When are the nationalists, with their Stannary superpower of vetoing Westminster, going to actually do something about this "genocide", which only they perceive? I mean, their sole tactics so far seems to be in organising failed protests, and turning people away from their cause on this website by displaying their particularity unpleasant personalities. You'd think that genocide would require more courage, and overt action, to stop it.

  • KernowGB  |  March 30 2012, 11:20PM

    by Big_Ger - Friday, March 30 2012, 10:27PM "You'd think that genocide would require more courage, and overt action, to stop it." ------------------------------------------------------- When and where, throughout history, has that ever proven to be the case - especially in modern times?

  • KernowGB  |  March 31 2012, 12:59PM

    For easy reference, I copy another extract (over 2 posts) from the link that I posted on Friday, March 30 2012, 3:49PM, namely: Seven tactics for denying the truth: 1. The "Ostrich" technique — (Tuning Out, Selective Exposure). 2. The "Rhinoceros" technique — (Source Derogation). 3. The "Eel" technique — (Displacement, Disputing Rationality). 4. The "Squid" technique — (Irrational Counterarguing). 5. The "Lizard" technique — (Selective Support, Attitude Bolstering). 6. The "Chameleon" technique. 7. The "Self-justifying Prosecutor" technique — (Inferred Justification). 1. The "Ostrich" technique comes into action when you — the questioner — are talking to a person — the subject — and present evidence that his or her beliefs about a topic are wrong. Cognitive dissonance creates a high state of stress, which is unpleasant, so the subject responds by blocking what is being said. In a common physiological response, the subject tunes out the message and severs the channel of communication, just staring back with a blank look. Withdrawing from reality ends further engagement with the questioner. [A popular myth is that the Ostrich reacts to threats by digging a hole and hiding its head in the sand; in fact, the Ostrich lies down to look like a lump.] 2. The "Rhinoceros" technique involves attacking the questioner while ignoring the question. This action could range from politely disputing the questioner's credentials and expertise, to implying a corrupt or dishonest motive (i.e. a deliberate ploy), to outright insults and violence. The questioner could be accused of being brainwashed, even though the subject is more likely the one holding onto mistaken beliefs in this instance. Any pretext that can justify a personal attack on the questioner is useful. A real or imagined social, religious, or racial difference between the questioner and subject can be brought up in a classic prejudicial attack: for example, the questioner is accused of being fascist, totalitarian, communist, anarchist, etc. [When annoyed or threatened in any way, the Rhinoceros just puts its head down and charges the source of annoyance.] 3. The "Eel" technique is a response that engages at some minimal level, but the response is founded upon irrationality. The person holding the false belief — the subject — answers that the issue does not depend upon facts, but is instead purely a matter of opinion. Clinging to this absurdity, however, any rational discussion would be extraneous to the topic and logical argument is futile. There is some minimal engagement but no analysis. The existing false belief is maintained intact and free of any threat from revision because it has been displaced into the realm of opinion as far as the subject is concerned. [The skin of an Eel is covered by slimy mucus so that when someone tries to catch one, it slips out of grasp.] 4. The "Squid" technique invents evidence that obscures what the questioner is claiming. In protecting an irrational belief, the subject who holds such a belief is forced to introduce many irrelevant arguments. The problem is that the subject is supporting an irrational belief against the questioner's competing rational thesis backed by logic and facts. Using verification as the basis for arguing could settle the argument very quickly, but that is never the case. The strategy's goal is to fully engage in order to confuse the issue and retain the false belief, not to allow it to be questioned. It is impossible to produce a coherent logic to defend an irrational held belief. [The Squid frustrates its predators by releasing a cloud of ink in the water, making it impossible to see anything and facilitating its escape.] to be continued in next post

  • KernowGB  |  March 31 2012, 1:00PM

    continuation 5. The "Lizard" technique is a method of ignoring the evidence presented against a false belief, and instead bringing in other peripheral and distracting pieces of information that might seem to support the false belief. Here the subject tries to build up a logical but tangential edifice for supporting his or her false belief, skirting around the main logical objections to the belief itself, and employing a diversionary tactic. There is no direct engagement on the fundamental issue, only clever side-stepping. [The Lizard drops its still-wiggling tail to divert attention elsewhere while it escapes.] 6. The "Chameleon" technique utilizes basic deception to agree with the questioner. The subject listens sympathetically to the arguments. Possibly, the subject may be impressed at that instance by the logic, facts, and rational arguments, but even if this is an honest conviction, it is totally superficial and fleeting. The moment the subject is back in his or her usual milieu, he or she reverts to the original basis of misinformation. [The Chameleon changes its skin color to adapt to its environment and to social situations, responding to temperature, light conditions, mood, and sexual attraction. The change is temporary, and changing color for camouflage is only one aspect of this behavior.] 7. The "Self-justifying Prosecutor" technique justifies believing misinformation because it is accepted by authority and/or by the group majority. Presumably, something that is settled should not be questioned. No rational reason is needed for the initial acceptance of misinformation, just groupthink. What happens next is crucial, however: the subject's brain evolves circuits to create a seemingly rational explanation after the fact. Once that stage has been accomplished, then to the subject holding the false belief, it appears natural and obviously true. The subject claims that the consequences of this false belief (which may be substantial and even catastrophic) actually justify the belief itself. This thought process follows a perverted inverse logic, which assembles a fictitious backwards chain of reasoning to justify misinformation. The colorful label "Self-justifying Prosecutor" is drawn from the criminal justice system. Researchers documented the refusal of judges, prosecuting attorneys, detectives, and police officers to admit to error after a conviction was later reversed through DNA evidence (Tavris & Aronson, 2007). It is very common for the involved parties in the system to stubbornly dismiss the DNA testing and to reinterpret the old evidence so as to justify the original verdict, getting very angry with others in the same system who are re-opening cases already closed. The bottom line — which is never openly expressed — is that admitting error puts the entire system at risk, thus every effort must be made to deny the mistake. The need for self-justification leads prosecutors to use an inverted logic by which if a person actually went to jail, or was executed, then this outcome in itself is sufficient to justify the process that led to that person's conviction.

  • youngcornwall  |  March 31 2012, 1:39PM

    KernowGB.Do you really think people are going to bother to read that stuff, let alone take it in? I mentioned way back up the thread about "making the Cornish look silly", by continuing in your way you are just feeding the image of the Cornish country bumpkin that only eat pasties everyday.

  • KernowGB  |  March 31 2012, 2:30PM

    Some more corroborative evidence for you, and others, to digest. The following quoted extract is from the publication "Cornwall at the Crossroads" (1988), by the Cornish Social and Economic Research Group, that I referred to in my post of Thursday, March 29 2012, 5:57PM, above, contained under the section-heading "Ethnocide by default" on page 157: --------------------------------------------------------------- "In 1951 over 70% of the people of Cornwall had been born in Cornwall and in 1961, with continuing population decline, no doubt nearer 80% would have regarded themselves as Cornish. By 1981, after two decades of rapid growth, the percentage of native Cornish among the population was probably around 55%. By 2001, at the present rate, that proportion will be more like 45%. And by the middle of the next century, unless migration is slowed dow, only 25-30% of the poulation will be Cornish… … Nevertheless, it is clear that we are living through a period of rapid social change, one in which the Cornish identity and, indeed, the very future of a distinct group of people who are recognisably Cornish is under threat… ...The Cornish can trace their heritage back 2,000 years or more, and yet the links between them and that heritage are now in danger of being snapped - and that in the space of just 50 years."

  • Taxman100  |  March 31 2012, 3:34PM

    KernowGB. You could learn from your own 'cut & paste' comments. It might have helped had you indicated who those behind the Cornish Social and Economic Research Group were. Perhaps, you could enlighten everyone. They refer to themselves as being 'independent', but are, I believe, more biased than many nationalists I have encountered. I recall reading a number of their articles/books (water, water, was one) some time ago. I will not be commenting on this forum for some weeks.

  • KernowGB  |  March 31 2012, 4:02PM

    by Taxman100 - Saturday, March 31 2012, 3:34PM "KernowGB. You could learn from your own 'cut & paste' comments. [...] They refer to themselves as being 'independent', but are, I believe, more biased than many nationalists I have encountered. [...] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- A true to form response. Since you do not substantiate anything that you have said, it is no more than just empty words and yet another 'denial' & diversionary ploy. What, in your 'opinion' could I learn from the evidence that I submit? Information about the authors of the publication is easily available to anyone that wishes to do a simple browser search. If you "believe" that they are 'more biased than nationalists', then you should have had the common decency to explain why you hold that 'opinion', with some examples to back it up so that others may compare. I suspect, in truth, it is only because they happen to present a Cornish argument from an academic point of view that upsets you. Would that make you 'biased', or 'prejudiced'?

  • Slimslad  |  March 31 2012, 5:56PM

    "It might have helped had you indicated who those behind the Cornish Social and Economic Research Group were. Perhaps, you could enlighten everyone. " I would like to know who these people are.

  • KernowGB  |  March 31 2012, 9:11PM

    Then exercise a little personal initiative and stop avoiding the issue

  • Big_Ger  |  March 31 2012, 10:09PM

    "You'd think that genocide would require more courage, and overt action, to stop it." ------------------------------------------------------- When and where, throughout history, has that ever proven to be the case - especially in modern times?" Mike informs us. Oh well, we may as well give up then, and accept that we are doomed. Or at least those who believe in the silly "Cornish Genocide" are doomed. The rest of us can carry on being Cornish and English and getting on with life. We can leave the nationalists to their doom and gloom and infighting.

  • KernowGB  |  March 31 2012, 11:34PM

    Just more of the same predictable diversionary misrepresentation.

  • Slimslad  |  April 01 2012, 9:08AM

    The same predictable reams of "proof" from unnamed sources.

  • Slimslad  |  April 01 2012, 10:54AM

    I "exercised a little personal initiative" and looked up the Cornish Social and Economic Research Group, and the members of the Group. Hardly "independent".

  • KernowGB  |  April 01 2012, 11:07AM

    Yet more unsubstatiated comment. Be brave! Share your knowledge!

  • KernowGB  |  April 01 2012, 12:04PM

    In a post above, I referred to Royal collusion in misrepresenting the true constitutional position as a positive indicator of the culpability in Cornish Genocide, because it knowingly changed the identity dynamic of the Cornish people from a Royal Duchy (a quasi Sovereign territorial possession of the Duke of Cornwall) into that of merely an English administrative county, whilst retaining the attached regalities for personal gain. At the same time developing 'official' propaganda to misrepresent the Duchy of Cornwall as a 'private' estate and nothing to do with the territory of Cornwall. This extract from the Duchy evidence in a case of arbitration against the Crown, 1855-1857, sets out the de jure position to expose the legal truth. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IV. The Duke of Cornwall acquired the Earldom of Cornwall by Act of Parliament, 11 Edw. III, antecedent to the first Charter, and thus the property claimed by the Duke was granted to the Black Prince. That there was such an Act of Parliament, and that it vested the Earldom in the Duke, is thus shown. In the seventh year of the reign of Henry V. the King was desirous of annexing the Manor, &c. of Isleworth, which was part of the possessions granted to the Black Prince, and also part of the Earldom of Cornwall, to the Abbey of St. Saviour. But the Manor being inalienably annexed to the Duchy it was necessary first to disannex the Manor, and then to grant it. To effect this the aid of Parliament was necessary and accordingly by Act and authority of Parliament the manor was disannexed and granted to the Abbey ; and by the authority of Parliament certain other manors were substituted for Isleworth and annexed to the Duchy, such annexation requiring an Act of Parliament as much as the disannexation and grant of the Manors of Isleworth did. The statute which annexed to the Duchy the substituted manors is on the Rolls of Parliament (9 Hen. V.) It recites the Act of Parliament disannexing, &c. Isleworth, and then proceeds to annex the substituted manors ; but previous to, the recital of the disannexing Act the title of the Dukes of Cornwall to the manor of Isleworth and their other possessions is stated, and such statement is an express affirmation of the Duke's title as depending, not merely upon the first Charter of Edw. III., but as being under a grant to Edward the Black Prince of the County of Cornwall by Act of Parliament, antecedent to the Charter. In the Report of the Prince's Case, 8 Rep. p. 27, we find this extract from the statute 9 Henry V,, "Vide Act of 9 Hen. V., for there it is affirmed by the whole Parliament : That at the Parliament held at Westminster the Monday next after the Feast of St. Matthias the Apostle in the 11th year of the reign of King Edw. III., amongst other things it was agreed that the eldest sons of the Kings of England, scilicet those who should be next heirs to the Realm of England, should be Dukes of Cornwall, and that the County of Cornwall should always remain as a Duchy to the eldest sons of the Kings of England, who should be next heirs to the said Realm without being given elsewhere." This is an accurate statement : the exact words are……." [Extract from Resumé of the Duchy Case - 1857] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To reaffirm the position of the Duchy, with respect to England, a Commission by the First Duke of Cornwall, in 1351, contained the following comment: "On account of certain escheats we command you that you inquire by all the means in your power how much land and rents, goods and chattels, whom and in whom, and of what value they are which those persons of Cornwall and England have, whose names we send in a schedule enclosed, "

  • Slimslad  |  April 01 2012, 7:52PM

    Be brave, KernowGB. Get drunk, smell the flowers, join the National Trust, collect stamps.

  • Lafrowda  |  April 01 2012, 9:50PM

    I am interested in the ""possession of the ginger gene." In Sennen if anyone has that colouring they are called "A red haired Dane" Probably because it was the legacy of Viking pillage and rapine among the dark haired natives.

  • KernowGB  |  April 01 2012, 10:11PM

    Predictable scintillating rubbish from Slimslad. Where is the alleged challenging argument that he, and his fellow 'truth-seekers' seems intent on making reference too?

  • KernowGB  |  April 01 2012, 10:34PM

    Another gem for the 'truth-seekers' and other that may be in 'denial' : In 1650 John Norden published a topographical history of the Duchie of Cornwall. The context of his observation regarding the Cornish is given by TGG in its 'Milestone' for 1650 as: -------------------------------------- "John Norden prepared "The General Historie of the Duchie of Cornwall" and gives us a brief view of the classical symptoms of external domination when he identifies the two factions of the Cornish population between the 'Gentlemen' who have "tasted ciuil education" and the "baser sort" who have not. The latter described as "And as they are amonge themselues litigious, so seem they yet to retayne a kinde of conceyled enuye agaynste the Englishe, whom they yet effecte with a desire of reuenge for their fathers sakes, by whome their fathers recuyued the repulse." We still see this engendered stigma for all things which are intrinsically Cornish as we are manipulated by high level lies from the top down and a tutored ignorance from the bottom up. ------------------------------------------------------------- The publication was originally addressed directly to the king of England.

  • Slimslad  |  April 02 2012, 9:19AM

    attack,harressed,(sic),bullied,attacking,pathetic. Emotive words.

  • Big_Ger  |  April 02 2012, 9:59AM

    When will we see any action from these nationalists? When will they veto Westminster law? When will they organise a mass protest? When will they close the Tamar bridge? When will they stand for election?

  • KernowGB  |  April 02 2012, 10:32AM

    by AnGof1955 - Monday, April 02 2012, 9:03AM "KernowGB, you are wasting your efforts trying to talk about truth to the Band of Trolls. ----------------------------------------------------------- That is all fully understood. I am simply pursuing their obviously bogus thread topic intention and presenting some factual evidence for others to be able to have an insight into what it is all about. It is obvious to anyone that they have neither the intention, nor the ability, to properly engage in the discussion, because of the reasons in my posts above at Saturday, March 31 2012, 12:59PM and Saturday, March 31 2012, 1:00PM.

  • Slimslad  |  April 02 2012, 11:02AM

    "they have neither the intention, nor the ability"? Nor the pomposity,arrogance and rudeness.

  • KernowGB  |  April 02 2012, 12:27PM

    This is a DISCUSSION Forum on "Cornish Genocide and The Truth". The truth is that Cornwall is a Royal Duchy that is extra-territorial to England and which does not merge into the Crown when there is no Duke for the time being. It is a perpetual grant that cannot be extinguished. It is not an English county, because that aspect of its civil government is vested in the Duke in his right of the Duchy. This means, in truth, that Cornwall is not in England and the Cornish are not English, as they well know. Official propaganda that implies that it is 'in England' and, as a consequence, its people are 'English' is complicit in, and culpable of, a process of Cornish genocide. As are those that wittingly, or unwittingly, support and promote that ideology. In addition to previous evidence, given above, the following two extracts from directly associated 'Duchy' evidence are worthy of notice: -------------------------------- Within the Letters Patent of the 16th March 1337, which created a new Earl of Salisbury, there is a reference to the Cornish grant, namely: "willing more securely to establish the Royal sceptre as well as by the addition of new honors as by the restoration of old ones, and to augment the number of nobles by whose counsels our realm may be directed in doubtful, and by whose suffrages be supported in adverse circumstances, have advanced our most dear first begotten Edward (whom in the prerogative of honour as is meet, we have caused to have precedence of others) to be Duke of Cornwall, over which awhile ago Dukes for a long time successively presided as chief rulers" --------------------------------- The following day, on the 17th March 1337, the Great Charter enumerating the details of the Cornish Duchy, affirmed the creation, and reinforced the purpose of the grant as: "Regarding therefore, with anxious consideration, those things whereby our kingdom may be adorned, and the same kingdom, and the holy church thereof, and other the lands subjected to our dominion, may be more securely and fitly defended against the attempts of enemies and of adversaries, and our peace preserved inviolate amongst our subjects everywhere; and desiring that places of note of the same kingdom should be adorned with their pristine honors, and reflecting on, and having more intimate regard to, the person of our dear and faithful Edward Earl of Chester, our first-begotten son, and willing that his person should be honored, we have, by the common assent and advice of the prelates, earls, barons, and others of our council, being in our present Parliament, convened at Westminster, on Monday next after the feast of Saint Matthias the Apostle last past, given unto our same son the name and honor of Duke of Cornwall, and have advanced him as Duke of Cornwall ; and have girt him with a sword, as is meet" NB. The first enumerated item, within the Charter was "the vicecomitatus with apputenances". (see also the post at Sunday, April 01 2012, 12:04PM) ---------------------------------------

  • KernowGB  |  April 02 2012, 1:48PM

    I could not agree more with what you say, AnGof1955, but once the right information is posted to this thread, it is publicly available to any casual user/browser that has the courage to get past the dross. If there is no good honest source information in the public domain, these flawed 'truth-seekers' will get away with their very dubious, and suspicious, agenda. There are enough questions now being asked about the position of the Duchy to make every aspect of positive information very valuable indeed. They can ignore us, but we can equally ignore them and get on with making the truth known to a wider, even if casual, audience. That is what is important and they provide an ideal gateway for this to be done. You are so right, when you say that they do not fool anyone!

  • AnGof1955  |  April 02 2012, 1:55PM

    I travelled to the Border parts of Cornwall. That Land adjoineth England only with it's Eastern Boundary, ..... and the Men of Cornwall speak the Breton Tongue. John De Grandisson, Bishop fo Exeter 1327-1369

  • Slimslad  |  April 02 2012, 2:02PM

    "You will notice that they NEVER post facts opposing the Cornish Movements position"? That is because there is no "position". Total twisted history from the 16th century "genocide" to the manufactured language.

  • Slimslad  |  April 02 2012, 2:04PM

    "making the truth known to a wider, even if casual, audience"? "Casual"? Another word for completely ignoring the "truth".

  • AnGof1955  |  April 02 2012, 2:48PM

    You have to feel for a Person who openly states: Total twisted history from the 16th century "genocide" to the manufactured language." Then you look back at KernowGB's posts and everyone has the source included. You can read about all this in decent History Book's where the sources are all quoted. When you see that, you have to ask yourself 'totally twisted History'???? Then the second part 'manufactured Language'. Manufacture to make something, implying that the Language is a made up Language. Then you see all the sources relating to the History of the Language. You see all the Language around us everyday in Placenames etc; You can ever read the Medieval Miricle Plays and other references to the Language. It makes you wonder wether a Person who can make such a statement is really on this Planet. It obviously makes anything he posts on a website to need the greatest scruitiny before you can even ascribe any truth to it whatsoever.

  • AnGof1955  |  April 02 2012, 2:59PM

    Then we have another of the Trolls posting this: "When will we see any action from these nationalists? When will they veto Westminster law? When will they organise a mass protest? When will they close the Tamar bridge? When will they stand for election?" Well Nationalists do stand for Election, thats Mebyon Kernow, you know the People you like to abuse. Then there is the rest of your list, how sad. What makes you think we want to behave in the way you and your ilk wants? Why would we want to act like the very thing we are against? We stand for truth and Democracy. Even though it would be our Legal right to do all of that, it has to be the Will of the People. For without Democracy we have nothing.

  • KernowGB  |  April 02 2012, 3:03PM

    by Slimslad - Monday, April 02 2012, 2:02PM ""You will notice that they NEVER post facts opposing the Cornish Movements position"? That is because there is no "position". Total twisted history from the 16th century "genocide" to the manufactured language." ------------------------------------------- There is obviously a 'position', because you are attempting to respond to it by insinuation rather than substance. If it is, as you allege, 'twisted' history and a 'manufactured' language, perhaps you could elaborate further and justify your 'opinions' and how it has any relevance to this topic. --------------------------------------------- by Slimslad Monday, April 02 2012, 2:04PM ""making the truth known to a wider, even if casual, audience"? "Casual"? Another word for completely ignoring the "truth"." ----------------------------------------- Once again you make a comment, by picking on a word out of context (namely, 'casual') and then attempt to relate it to something to which it has no connection whatsoever. If you feel that there is some connection, why not share with everyone what that connection is between a casual browser and "Another word for ignoring the truth". If you continue to compare apples with pears, then your narrow agenda becomes even clearer to everyone.

  • KernowGB  |  April 02 2012, 3:09PM

    I think that another source reference point has been won. Let us just reflect upon the words of Edmund Burke, in the Westminster Parliament on the 11th February 1780: --------------------------------------------- "…. First, with regard to the sovereign jurisdictions, I must observe, Sir that whoever takes a view of this kingdom in a cursory manner, will imagine, that he beholds a solid, compacted, uniform system of monarchy; in which all inferior jurisdictions are but as rays diverging from one centre. But, on examining it more nearly, you will find much eccentricity and confusion. It is not a monarchy in strictness, but, as in Saxon times this country was a heptarchy, it is now a strange sort of pentarchy. It is divided into five several distinct principalities besides the supreme …. If you travel beyond Mount Edge***be, you will find him [the king] once more in his incognito, and he is Duke of Cornwall …. Thus every one of these principalities has the apparatus of a kingdom …. Cornwall is the best of them: but when you compare the charge with the receipt, you will find that it furnishes no exception to the rule …." ------------------------------------------ This extract came from a speech that he made in an attempt to merge all the 'principalities' into the Crown. It was a Bill that failed, because it was considered unconstitutional at that time, plus the fact that the Duke of Cornwall was not yet 21 and could not 'defend his rights'. The complete Bill was dissolved on the 28th June 1780.

  • Slimslad  |  April 02 2012, 3:41PM

    "I think that another source reference point has been won." All these references,all this evidence, all these "truths". For what? Nothing has happened, nothing will happen. Myths and legends.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 02 2012, 4:31PM

    "Nothing has happened, nothing will happen. Myths and legends." This Cornish genocide just isn't captivating the peoples priorities or interests, it is as simple as that, these nats are clinging on to a pie in the sky fools gold existence, hoping for a break through, if these nats were to spend more of their time and efforts on the day to day needs of the people, they would get more thought of.

  • KernowGB  |  April 02 2012, 4:46PM

    Better to base your 'opinions' on a sound foundation rather than prejudice, because time has a habit of exposing weak foundations http://tinyurl.com/brf2luw

  • youngcornwall  |  April 02 2012, 7:36PM

    To be honest KernowGB I was hoping for a little more mixed response to this thread, out of the 160 or so posting you can count the number of posters on one hand, that on its own should show the appetite for such things is not there, when the time is right if there is ever a right time, this forum and others like it will not be able to contain the amount of interest being generated, in the meantime, as we are now, I suppose this does well to keep the "Myths and legends." well alive. In the mean time I admire your steadfastness.

  • KernowGB  |  April 03 2012, 12:49AM

    I do not believe it is about the "appetite for such things" so much as a lack of confidence in understanding what it all means and how to approach, and discuss, it. The knee-jerk reaction, which the subject usually evokes is coloured by the way the concept has been misrepresented by official sources, for example the UN. Neither is it is about "myths and legends", it is about facing the truth head-on and following the good advice offered by Thomas Hammarberg that I linked to in my post of Wednesday, March 28 2012, 4:43PM.

  • Slimslad  |  April 03 2012, 7:35AM

    Real "cultural genocide" With the protestors setting fire to themselves. http://tinyurl.com/ccsuodj Not tearing t.v. licenses up. Or going without pasties for a week.

  • AnGof1955  |  April 03 2012, 10:21AM

    by Slimslad Tuesday, April 03 2012, 7:35AM . "Real "cultural genocide" With the protestors setting fire to themselves. http://tinyurl.com/ccsuodj Not tearing t.v. licenses up. Or going without pasties for a week." Nothing positive to contribute: Troll, Troll, Troll, Troll.

  • KernowGB  |  April 03 2012, 10:35AM

    Slimslad, it is surprising given your past contributions, but not interesting or relevant, that you see some direct comparison between the Human Rights excesses of the Chinese Empire and the British State, but you still fail miserably, and embarassingly, to understand the concept of 'genocide' or to the way to responded to it. Not unexpected given your general treatment on this thread as a perpetrator. It is good, however, to see that you are browsing to improve your mind, but if you are going to be selective, please stop letting yourself down by comparing apples with pears. There is no such thing as "Real cultural genocide" or "Real genocide". There is only "Genocide" and a number of techniques in how it may be achieved. Each case, whilst coming under the generic heading of 'genocide', is unique to each group because of many factors that seem, at the moment, to be beyond your comprehension. By selectively choosing one example to compare with another is a pitiful display of gross ignorance. Each is unique and requires its own way of exposing, and dealing, with it. Keep browsing, but please do attempt to be open-minded and objective about it, because you have a very discerning audience.

  • AnGof1955  |  April 03 2012, 11:22AM

    by youngcornwall Monday, April 02 2012, 7:36PM . "To be honest KernowGB I was hoping for a little more mixed response to this thread, out of the 160 or so posting you can count the number of posters on one hand, You of all People should know better. This thread is purely aimed at getting a reaction so that the Gang of Trolls can continue to post their untruths. They post ignorant things purley to get a reaction to their lies. They then compound it with other lies to increase the intensity of the reaction, then hey! Nationalist extremists. I used to get angry with them, but now I simply feel sorry for them. The reason only a few have responded is because everyone knows what they are up to and chose to go elsewhere. These sad, pathetic Trolls contribute nothing to either this site or the World in General. However they feel free to attack People who do more in a Week then they do in a lifetime. Do you blame People for not wanting to get intangled with the likes of them? I know I don't.

  • Slimslad  |  April 03 2012, 12:18PM

    You misunderstand,KGB. That comparison was made by a Nationalist, comparing the "fast/hunger strike of one of your own, to the plight of priests in Tibet.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 03 2012, 12:52PM

    That is a very good explanation AnGof1955, not totally unexpected coming from you it must be said, not forgetting, there are those that could quite easily put you in the troll category AnGof1955, where do we go to from there. Live and let live is the best policy I would say, if you get comfort out of thinking that the majority of those who have read the contents of this thread agree with you about this Cornish genocide, I wouldn't take any bets on it.

  • KernowGB  |  April 03 2012, 1:22PM

    by Slimslad Tuesday, April 03 2012, 12:18PM "You misunderstand,KGB. That comparison was made by a Nationalist, comparing the "fast/hunger strike of one of your own, to the plight of priests in Tibet." --------------------------------------------------------------------- Having responded directly to your post, there was absolutely no misunderstanding on my part. There was nothing about your comment to suggest that you were using someone else's words and misrepresenting it as your own. If you are now back-tracking and saying that you have quoted something 'out of context', then do the decent think and post the proof (namely the source) that it was said, by what you have termed, 'a nationalist' (how do you know that?) so that others may further judge your integrity, or lack of it. However, it does not alter the fact that you, even if plagiarised, did post it as your comment.

  • KernowGB  |  April 03 2012, 1:59PM

    Worth bearing in mind the words of a notable Cornish academic, in response to a particularly prejudiced series of lectures by a very Anglo-centric academic, in November 2010, namely: ------------------------------------- Having survived the twentieth century, demands for the right to be Cornish in Cornwall and to be treated with due respect have re-emerged, but this time in a less apologetic and more combative manner. The writing for those who would prefer Cornwall's status as an English county to remain unchanged is on the wall. Even academics now break the Establishment ranks and claim that ethnicity was a key factor in the events of the late fifteenth to mid-seventeenth centuries, according to Oliver 600-800 years after Cornwall became English. In the face of such dangerous revisionism we should not at all be surprised if, in the memorable phrase of Mark Stoyle (2002, 112), there is an attempt:- --------- 'to thrust the historiography of early modem Cornwall firmly back into the box labelled "English local history", and to nail down the lid'. --------- Sometimes ascribed to Gandhi but apparently based on an address by American trade union leader Nicholas Klein in 1914 is the quotation:- --------- 'First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win'. --------- We appear to be in the third phase of this particular process.

  • AnGof1955  |  April 03 2012, 3:50PM

    youngcornwall: I am definately not a Troll. What I am though is someone who is Proud to be a Cornish Nationalist. You asked in an earlier post, are the Cornish that easily led, the answer is like all Humanity yes they are. I have fought for Cornish Nationalism for over thirty five Years, and will spend the rest of my Life doing the same. I do not get comfort from anything but the truth, there is plenty of it posted here by KernowGB. The nievity of those who think we have been taught the truth in Schools is proof that People are easily led. Every Country and every State sets it's own agenda, that of the British State is/was one of English Imperialism, you know it and I know it. What People believe to be true and what is are often two different things. There is only one truth, it is that simple, there cannot be two. Opinions are not truth. I have never hid my Nationalism from anyone, on here or in real life, and I never will. I would also be more than willing to discuss any subject face to face, if thats what anyone wanted. I don't talk the talk, I actually walk the walk.

  • Slimslad  |  April 03 2012, 6:27PM

    "Worth bearing in mind the words of a notable Cornish academic" Let me guess.. Payton?

  • KernowGB  |  April 03 2012, 7:23PM

    An anticipated and predictable response. It is obvious to anyone that he/they have neither the intention, nor the ability, to properly engage in the discussion, because of the reasons in my posts above at Saturday, March 31 2012, 12:59PM and Saturday, March 31 2012, 1:00PM." If you respond to my previous request to you (at Tuesday, April 03 2012, 1:22PM), I shall reciprocate by responding to your predictable guess. Fair?

  • youngcornwall  |  April 03 2012, 7:59PM

    AnGof1955 I respect your dedication and drive for the truth as you see it, but in all honesty looking at this Cornish genocide from the nats point of view, that it is still going on now today, do you not think this is a hard pill to swallow for any straight thinking person? It is no good for the nats to keep saying it is happening and we cannot see it because we have closed minds, where is the proof that it is happening now today? So that we can check it out for ourselves, not something someone has said or written about, but something in the here and now would be a great help.

  • AnGof1955  |  April 03 2012, 9:13PM

    youngcornwall, thanks for your response. As Nationalists we believe that Cornwall is one of the Historic Nations of Britain, and that the Cornish People are a National minority within these Islands. Genocide comes in many forms from the simplistic killing of those People to things like assimilation. That is what is effecting the Cornish Race, assimilation, and in my opinion it is a very cowardly way to do it. People want to come to Cornwall not just because of it's wonderful scenary, but because of it's way of life. That way of life is fast disapearing because the Cornish are becoming a minority in their own Land. It is the Cornish People themselves that make that way of life and once gone it will be gone forever. The Cornish themselves have always welcomed non Cornish into our midst and have always made them welcome, we are a friendly People. However this dismissal of our Identity is a disgrace and a shameful inditement on our English neighbours. Nationalists do NOT hate the English, let's get that straight, what we love is the Cornish and our ways. You want the proof of Genocide, look at how our real identity is dismissed by an uncaring Government and look at the vast influx of non Cornish and then tell me it is not happening. Some of us are not like the Sheep who will go meekly to our Deaths, we are determined to go down fighting. Fighting not with Guns or Bombs for that is not our way, but to go down shouting about this injustice done to our People, our Identity, our Nation.

  • Slimslad  |  April 03 2012, 9:17PM

    "An anticipated and predictable response." Yet no answer... Was the quote from Payton? How keen are you to attribute sources from the 13th/14/16/ th century, yet those from "a notable Cornish academic", are anonymous?

  • KernowGB  |  April 03 2012, 9:21PM

    How about reading and discussing all that has been said before and responding directly, and objectively, to the many posts that are currently being ignored by the denial quartet. Especially the following posts that responded to yoursel and B_G above at Thursday, March 29 2012, 5:57PM and Thursday, March 29 2012, 5:57PM. Not forgetting the supplementary comment at Thursday, March 29 2012, 8:20PM.

  • KernowGB  |  April 03 2012, 9:39PM

    Slimslad, it is not anonymous it is simply withheld, because it is irrelevant. What is important is the comment made that adds to the context of what is going on by your, and other's, intention not to engage, but to simply repeat your ignorant 'mantra of denial', whilst attempting to divert attention to others not involved directly in this topic. There is blatantly no intention to qualify anything that any of you have said. You have deliberately avoided, once again, responding to my, or any, request for information or a substantive response and using 'avoidance' as an excuse to make some imagined derogatory point which you cannot, or will not, substantiate. There is not an ounce of integrity in your body, at least as far as engaging with this topic is concerned.

  • AnGof1955  |  April 03 2012, 10:10PM

    KernowGB, that Troll has no intention of posting any Facts to back his position. He never has and never will, period. Notice how he describes 'Payton', and posts "a notable Cornish academic" in this sarcastic way to try and belittle this Man. Who by the way Troll is a Professor of History. Now, what are your Acadmical Qualifications Mr Troll?

  • KernowGB  |  April 03 2012, 11:47PM

    That is quite correct, AnGof1955, because there are not any. No challenges either, and hell-bent on casting aspersions with the intent to implant negative and derogatory associations against an individual or organisation. These are classic examples of "Cognitive Dissonance" and denial. As, of course, is his erroneous limitation, and misrepresentation on articles, references, and comment that I have posted, which clearly covers the period from the 14th C to the present day. Our view of Cornish history shows continuity for, at least the past 2000 years, but theirs, retrospectively has no continuity whatsoever and there cannot be any convergence until the advice of Thomas Hammarberg (referred to above, Tuesday, April 03 2012, 12:49AM) is pursued.

  • Slimslad  |  April 04 2012, 8:08AM

    "It is not anonymous it is simply withheld" Who quotes reams of academic work without quoting a source? Why would anyone do this? Is the "notable Cornish academic" Philip Payton?

  • Big_Ger  |  April 04 2012, 8:26AM

    "You want the proof of Genocide, look at how our real identity is dismissed by an uncaring Government and look at the vast influx of non Cornish and then tell me it is not happening." Translation: People move in and out of Cornwall, we don't like it. We want Cornwall for ourselves. "Some of us are not like the Sheep who will go meekly to our Deaths, we are determined to go down fighting. Fighting not with Guns or Bombs for that is not our way, but to go down shouting about this injustice done to our People, our Identity, our Nation." Translation: We're going to moan and groan and complaint on the internet, until someone else makes things right for us. What if 99% of Cornish people do not want you, your ideas, and least of all, fools like you having any influence over Cornwall! Can you not take a hint? Your idiocy is not wanted..

  • Big_Ger  |  April 04 2012, 8:29AM

    When will we see any action from these nationalists? When will they veto Westminster law? When will they organise a mass protest? When will they close the Tamar bridge? When will they stand for election?"

  • KernowGB  |  April 04 2012, 8:30AM

    by Slimslad - Wednesday, April 04 2012, 8:08AM Is the "notable Cornish academic" Philip Payton?" -------------------------------------------------------- Slimslad, It is patently obvious that you have a problem with simple comprehension, when it suits your particular agenda. This will be my final response to your Cognitive Dissonance time-wasting posts. I have given you the reason why I did not give the name, but if you feel that it will serve some devious purpose of yours, I will repeat what I said above, namely: ----------------------------------------------- by KernowGB Tuesday, April 03 2012, 9:39PM "Slimslad, it is not anonymous it is simply withheld, because it is irrelevant. What is important is the comment made that adds to the context of what is going on by your, and other's, intention not to engage, but to simply repeat your ignorant 'mantra of denial', whilst attempting to divert attention to others not involved directly in this topic. There is blatantly no intention to qualify anything that any of you have said. You have deliberately avoided, once again, responding to my, or any, request for information or a substantive response and using 'avoidance' as an excuse to make some imagined derogatory point which you cannot, or will not, substantiate. There is not an ounce of integrity in your body, at least as far as engaging with this topic is concerned." ------------------------------------------ Also, namely: ------------------------------------------- by KernowGB Tuesday, April 03 2012, 7:23PM "An anticipated and predictable response. It is obvious to anyone that he/they have neither the intention, nor the ability, to properly engage in the discussion, because of the reasons in my posts above at Saturday, March 31 2012, 12:59PM and Saturday, March 31 2012, 1:00PM." If you respond to my previous request to you (at Tuesday, April 03 2012, 1:22PM), I shall reciprocate by responding to your predictable guess. Fair?" ---------------------------------------------------- Time for you to show some honesty and integrity, in your flawed search for 'the truth' instead of pathetically avoiding the issues that the alleged 'truth quartet' started.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 04 2012, 9:52AM

    AnGof1955 Surely what you are against and what the nates are fighting is natural progression, the intermingling of people both ways in and out of Cornwall, in real terms progress, you say you are not but this is how it is coming over. You ask any Cornish person of my era which is best, before or after, when there were no duel-carriageways in and out of the county, when a big majority of the houses didn't have bathrooms and only toilets down the garden, I could go on and on, these are the sort of things people are interested in, day to day living. The nats in real terms are trying to reinvent the wheel with this genocide thing, some could say try to cause unrest amongst the people, the truth is we are at the stage now where we cannot differentiate between those born in the county and those who were not, does it really matter? In 50 or so years time these same people could be saying we are more Cornish than the next, and why not.

  • Slimslad  |  April 04 2012, 9:53AM

    "This will be my final response to your Cognitive Dissonance time-wasting posts" "Every cloud has a silver lining" (John Milton coined the phrase 'silver lining' in Comus: A Mask Presented at Ludlow Castle, 1634)

  • AnGof1955  |  April 04 2012, 10:31AM

    As my last post will definately be removed This will be my last posting.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 04 2012, 10:53AM

    by AnGof1955 "What we want is a Cornish future, with Cornish Culture in a Modern and Vibrant Cornwall." OK AnGof1955 how about putting a little meat on the bone of this "Cornish Culture" that you want, and how this genocide thing is supposed to help in the nats endeavours?

  • youngcornwall  |  April 04 2012, 2:59PM

    I must have missed your most recent posting AnGof1955. You have said what you wanted to say now stand by it, where is your fight, I will not say Bulldog spirit, but you know what I mean. by AnGof1955 Tuesday, April 03 2012, 11:22AM "I used to get angry with them, but now I simply feel sorry for them." You see it is these contradictions AnGof1955 that let the nats side down, no consistency in what is being said, you may "walk the walk" but can anyone trust what you have to say if and when you talk the talk? Bowing out now after you have completed your stint, so another replacement nat can take over is a little demeaning on your part with this self inflicted excuse.

  • KernowGB  |  April 04 2012, 5:03PM

    by youngcornwall - Wednesday, April 04 2012, 2:59PM [...] You see it is these contradictions AnGof1955 that let the nats side down, no consistency in what is being said, [...] You pick up on a vague point that you claim is some form of inconsistencey and then you roll that out to encompass every one that you claim is a nationalist, but you never elaborate with other examples to show that you are making a legitimate comparison. Please read page 9 of the document linked to above at Friday, March 30 2012, 3:46PM, with a working link also posted at Friday, March 30 2012, 3:49PM. Followed later with the relevant items posted over two posts at Saturday, March 31 2012, 12:59PM and Saturday, March 31 2012, 1:00PM. You speak of inconsistency on a thread that you started, with the subject title "Cornish Genocide and The Truth", but you have yet to pick up on anything that has been said that sets the scene for what is the truth, the background to it, the primary and secondary cause that has institutionalised it, and those, like yourself, that drive it. The reasons why this neurosis exists is also given above, but you are afraid to pick up and run with it, because you have no real answers to offer except apply all the tricks of 'denial'. The answer is simple. Accept it and take steps to stop it. The answers, and the information are all contained above, but it needs an open mind that is willing to engage sincerely. There has been no sign of that and that is a perfectly valid and reasonable for no longer wasting time in responding to simply more denial and prevarication. This has been, for me, an opportunity to post some meaningful information into an otherwise barren place, but the wider problem will/can only be resolved elsewhere, by more intelligent people from both sides of the current divide. Your responses to this will be predictably dismissive, but at least others will see the complete shallowness of your position.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 04 2012, 5:59PM

    OK KernowGB I will put it to you where AnGof1955 left off, no beating around the bush just straight talk please, if not do not bother replying because there would be no point. "OK AnGof1955 how about putting a little meat on the bone of this "Cornish Culture" that you want, and how this genocide thing is supposed to help in the nats endeavours?"

  • KernowGB  |  April 04 2012, 6:42PM

    You really are beyond belief. I have already stated that there is no point continuing, so you attempt to twist it to your pathetic advantage. You have had long enough to respond to anything, and everything, that I have said, but have been unable to. It is clear that your intention is only to perpetuate your little game of denial, with no substance or engagement. Not only flawed, but a fraud. Genocide exists. Stop it, then the answer to your question answers itself. It is not rocket science. Sort out your neurosis. It is all about respect and recognition.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 04 2012, 7:21PM

    "It is all about respect and recognition." We earn "respect" and "recognition" comes in all kinds of shapes and disguises. What the ultimate aims of the nats are, it is clear it cannot be easily explained. Unless someone knows different that is……..

  • Slimslad  |  April 04 2012, 7:42PM

    My apologies. "notable Cornish academic"? Bernard Deacon http://tinyurl.com/cvfyndr Why would AnGof1955 be so coy about naming his source? http://tinyurl.com/cegx2dy

  • KernowGB  |  April 05 2012, 9:50AM

    Respect only needs to be earnt by an individual. Respect for a national minority, or any minority group, should be the starting place by all other people and peoples'. Have a read of one of the modern conventions "The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities" that seeks to address the policies of Genocide, which imperial powers were loathe to tackle in the 1948 Convention. The UK has ratified this Convention, which is legally binding, yet excludes the Cornish from it an an arbitrary way and refuses to be transparent about why. http://tinyurl.com/cov8syz If this site converts it properly? If not just google the name of the Convention. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! NOW! Recognise the Cornish national minority under the Framework Convention (FCNM), and PROTECT our National Border with England. Teach Cornish History and other subjects in our Cornish School.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 05 2012, 11:59AM

    …."Respect only needs to be earnt by an individual"…. Even more so, when the individual has taken it on to speak for others, and try to sell something that people do not want, or are not looking for. …."Respect for a national minority, or any minority group, should be the starting place by all other people and peoples"…. Yes there are minority groups within minority groups looking for a "starting place" and recognition, the nats and their genocide attention seeking, standing back and saying look at us, we are different, is very reminiscent to the Kings new suit fairy tale.

  • KernowGB  |  April 05 2012, 12:43PM

    An interesting extract from A K Hamilton Jenkin's "Cornwall and its People (1933)" indicates education as the source of the Cornish conundrum and the root of uncertainty about our Cornish identity. The extract gives an account of one Peggy Combellack in her dame-school, circa 1840: -------------------------------------------------- The next lesson was in geography. This subject was regarded by Peggy as her masterpiece of learning. "Es Coornwall a naation, a hiland, or what es 'a?" she inquired on one of these occasions. This question completely baffled the whole school, putting the scholars into one continued hubbub. "Ef I aint got a hanser in five menutes, I'll give 'ee all the custis" (caning on the hands), Peggy exclaimed. "I will have horder, though the owld school do cost more in canes than 'tes worth. Now what es Coornwall, I say. Es 'a a naation, a hiland or a furrin country?" "Boy Kit" was the first to hold up his hand. "Please, he hedn't no naation, he hedn't no hiland, nor he hedn't no furrin country, but he's cigged (stuck) on to a furrin country from the top hand," came the bright reply, which was heard with approval by the whole school, Peggy herself included.

  • Slimslad  |  April 06 2012, 7:59AM

    "Such are the Cornishmen; but who are you? Who but the unauthorized and lawless children of intruders, invaders and oppressors? Who but the transmitters of wrong, the inheritors of robbery? In claiming independence we claim but little. We might require you to depart from a land which you possess by usurpation, and to restore all that you have taken from us." The uncomfortable call for racial purity.

  • KernowGB  |  April 06 2012, 10:24AM

    by Slimslad - Friday, April 06 2012, 7:59AM ""Such are the Cornishmen; but who are you? Who but the unauthorized and lawless children of intruders, invaders and oppressors? Who but the transmitters of wrong, the inheritors of robbery? In claiming independence we claim but little. We might require you to depart from a land which you possess by usurpation, and to restore all that you have taken from us." ---- The uncomfortable call for racial purity." =============================================== Another weird, ill-considered reply (from one of the 'flawed-truth-seeker-quartet) that only looks one way and ignores the purpose behind the existence of 'Cornish Genocide', namely to make the Cornish people 'English'. Also a complete lack of understanding between the historical context of 'race' and the modern clinical definition of 'race' and some insatiable need to bring 'race' into it. Another sign of desperation indeed and another example of failure to understand what he was quoting from and the historical significance of what was being said within it. Was he wrong? Now you can ponder on some other synomyms for 'kill' ('destroy', 'replace', 'convert', 'change', or 'extinguish', etc). All it takes is a bit of lateral thinking in how to achieve a desired 'end result'. Using many processes ranging from 'Shock & Awe', 'Atrocity', or just 'plain sophisticated evil'. The choice is with those with the power and the will. However, I know that you will soon be working on another 'silly' comment of 'avoidance' and 'denial'. Now, what was it that Robert Louis Stevenson in his book, "Across the Plains" (1879)? :- ------------------------------------------------- "There were no emigrants direct from Europe - save one German family and a knot of Cornish miners who kept grimly to themselves, one reading the New Testament all day long through steel spectacles, the rest discussing privately the secrets of their old-world, mysterious race. Lady Hester Stanhope believed she could make something great of the Cornish; for my part, I can make nothing of them at all. A division of races, older and more original than Babel, keeps this close, esoteric family apart from neighbouring Englishmen. Not even a Red Indian seems more foreign in my eyes. This is one of the lessons of travel - that some of the strangest races dwell next door to you at home." ---------------------------------------------------------------------

  • Slimslad  |  April 06 2012, 11:26AM

    "Another weird, ill-considered reply (from one of the 'flawed-truth-seeker-quartet) that only looks one way and ignores the purpose behind the existence of 'Cornish Genocide', namely to make the Cornish people 'English'. Or an attempt to make English people Celtic?

  • KernowGB  |  April 06 2012, 12:31PM

    It was H J Paton, in his "The Claim of Scotland"(1968), who drew our attention to a poem in the Punch magazine which ended with the words "Under Mr. De Valera Ireland changed its name to Eire. Britain strictly keeps its name, It's called England just the same."

  • Slimslad  |  April 06 2012, 1:10PM

    The treatment of Ireland, down the ages, by England, has been disgraceful, no doubt. But not Cornwall.

  • KernowGB  |  April 06 2012, 3:10PM

    In Simon Schama's UK television series on 'A History of Britain' there is one quote - a universal truth, applied to perfection in Cornwall, which we ignore at our peril - which I would like to share with you. ------------------------------------------ "...However, the subjugation of Wales was more than the surgical application of brute force. Edward had the chilling - uncannily modern! - knowledge that to break your enemy you must first strip him of his cultural identity..." ------------------------------------------- Simon Schama also well illustrates the focus of Edward the First - who inherited the Earldom of Cornwall and whose tomb bears the legend 'Hammer of the Scots' - as: ------------------------------------------ "After a century of rule by kings who are essentially Frenchmen, Edward can be called the first truly English king - given an old Anglo-Saxon name [named after Edward the Confessor] and imbued with a frightening certainty that it was England's Imperial mission to take its rule to the four corners of the British island" ------------------------------------------

  • Slimslad  |  April 06 2012, 4:27PM

    The treatment of Wales and Scotland, down the ages, by England, has been disgraceful, no doubt. But not Cornwall.

  • KernowGB  |  April 06 2012, 5:47PM

    by Slimslad Friday, April 06 2012, 4:27PM "The treatment of Wales and Scotland, down the ages, by England, has been disgraceful, no doubt. But not Cornwall." ---------------------------------------------- As if you would know, or admit to. The aggressive stance upon identity arises out of the fact of this domination and the gradual establishment of the Imperial concept of the 'Island of England'. Many people are most probably aware of, if not the full text, the punchlines from Shakespeare's John of Gaunt speech from Richard II as given in the following extract: "This royal throne of kings, this scepter'd isle... ...This precious stone set in a silver sea... ...This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England...".

  • Slimslad  |  April 06 2012, 7:07PM

    England has a disgraceful record in its treatment of Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and a huge portion of the World. But not Cornwall.

  • KernowGB  |  April 06 2012, 7:24PM

    The subliminal power of this form of aggression has far-reaching consequences still:- a the development of insidious half-truths [The River Tamar is our national border with England and not a county boundary with Devonshire]; b the failure to use, or differentiate, within their correct contexts, the terms British and English; c a flawed perception by others with regard to the true relationship of the Imperial British State to the constituent nations which make up the State, and d a misrepresented and manipulated identity for the ordinary English - and Cornish - person.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 06 2012, 7:41PM

    Games set and match to Slimslad,..."But not Cornwall." No thrills no fancy foot work, just plain talk "But not Cornwall." "But not Cornwall." Unless someone knows different that is…..

  • KernowGB  |  April 06 2012, 8:09PM

    Surely you jest? The following letter was sent to Prime Minister, Tony Blair, as part of additional material to a petition on Devolution on 28ans mys Ebrel 1998. Whilst the Prime Minister's office did send an acknowledgement, there have been no other communications from any of the recipients!? Dear Sirs, This letter is written and enclosed, as supporting material, to a Petition prepared by others but fully supported by this organisation. Insofar as any deliberations on Cornwall will be considered - and possibly dismissed - upon the false premise that Cornwall is merely an English administrative county, I feel obliged to draw some additional matters to your attention. A Cornwall is the only indigenous national group within the multi-national British State which is not recognised by the Westminster Government. B All matters affecting Cornwall are based on the false premise that Cornwall is merely an administrative county of England with a county boundary between Cornwall and Devonshire rather than the de jure status of Celtic Country with a national Border (a deliberate act of segregation by an English King) between Cornwall and England. C The Cornish nation-state, as legally constituted by the creation of the Royal Duchy of Cornwall, has been wilfully suppressed and fragmented by successive Westminster Governments with no regard for the Cornish or their Rights. D Implicit and inalienable within the creation of the Duchy of Cornwall is the fact of Cornwall's non-English identity. E Perceptions of what is the Duchy of Cornwall are being wilfully manipulated by Crown and State and are repugnant to the inalienable Rights of the Cornish people to be Cornish and, more importantly, to be seen to be Cornish. F There is nothing within the status quo which in any way protects the historical and inalienable Rights of the Cornish people. G Government policy is wilfully imposing policies which act directly against the interests and inalienable Rights of the Cornish people - particularly those policies which are calculated to demean and destroy our territorial relationship. H True historical facts of the Cornish people and our territory are excluded from all state information and systems. I Cornwall has been denied a place within the National Curriculum thus seriously and wilfully affecting current and future perceptions of history and geography and all other related disciplines with regard to Cornwall. J All matters relating to Cornwall and its efforts to achieve a Cornish European Constituency have, since 1978, been frustrated due to a failure to accord Cornwall its proper place in both British and European history and geography - a significant and fundamental failure of the democratic process based on prejudice. K The application of Proportional Representation for European Constituencies which fails to recognise the Rights of the Cornish to their own regional representation will be seriously flawed. L Successive Westminster Governments, in my opinion, are guilty of ongoing culpable genocide of the Cornish people. M Uncontrolled population movement into Cornwall and the insidious destruction of Cornwall's territorial integrity over the past forty plus years poses a serious and calculated threat to the Cornish identity. How would England have coped if the roles were reversed and, at least, a million (net) arrogant and affluent Cornish emigrated to England every year since the 1950s? That only refers to the numerical problems! N I consider the Westminster Government incompetent through prejudice to decide upon Cornwall's long-term future and that this should be left to an impartial International Committee involved with Human Rights. O The ability of the Cornish to defend their identity at the end of the twentieth century is an example of endurance based on a deeply felt belief in ourselves. Its manifestation this century, above all, is not because of the good grace of Crown or Westminster but because of the lack of it.

  • Slimslad  |  April 06 2012, 8:57PM

    Not Cornwall.

  • Big_Ger  |  April 06 2012, 9:51PM

    You know, with all this fantastic(al) evidence that KernowGB keeps spamming the place with, you'd think by now they would have enough to storm the barricades of Westminster, and to get what they think is right. But they do not. Parochial thinking, and total inaction. Is it no wonder that they get nowhere? Oh, and of course there are the two other main factors in the failure of Cornish nationalism; 1) Cornish nationalists are deeply unpleasant people, which in part explains; 2) no one here in Cornwall supports this band of about 12 malcontents and failures, and no one wants Cornish nationalism to succeed. So combine evidence based on out of date laws, myths, and supposition, with a total inability to get anything done, no protest movement or show of strength, make it driven by deeply unpleasant and unlikeable people, add in a total lack of support, disinterest, and overt hostility from the very people they are supposed to represent, and you have a recipe for achieving nothing at all, (apart from lots of moaning gnashing of teethand hand-wringing on the internet.)

  • KernowGB  |  April 06 2012, 10:43PM

    Not one scrap of engagement or intelligent argument. I now commend this topic to everyone to read through many times and seek to explain, why of all the constituent nations of these islands, only the Cornish are stated, by the flawed four, not to have been treated badly by the English Imperial State (EIS). The only one to have its legal constitution lied about (at the very top) and failure to address the formal education needs of a people to its own history and an administrative status that cannot do justice to its national needs, with a colonial repopulation that is an obscenity in itself. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW! That is me done!

  • Big_Ger  |  April 06 2012, 11:15PM

    Stop wining about your imagined genocide and do something about it! Do you not have the courage of your conviction? Do you not think that if there were a genuine genocide happening in the UK that the people of Britain would rise up against it! It's all a little fantasy in your head man. Either a) there is "genocide" in Cornwall, but as Cornish nationalists are the only ones to see it, and they are too cowardly to do anything about it, it will continue. or, b) there is no genocide, but there is a Cornish nationalist movement which is so useless it cannot do anything but whine about genocide on the internet. or c) there is no genocide, and no support for a small bunch of wierdo's who inflict their nationalist fantasy on the rest of the county out of sheer self-absorption.

  • Slimslad  |  April 07 2012, 9:03AM

    That is me done!" It certainly is. Down... Out... And dusted.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 07 2012, 9:17AM

    by KernowGB Friday, April 06 2012, 10:43PM "STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW!" And as I have said on more than one occasion, is there any wonder that MK keeps bobbing along on the bottom whilst being painted with this same nats brush? http://tinyurl.com/26ydej7

  • Big_Ger  |  April 07 2012, 9:33AM

    I must admit that I feel sorry for the nationalists, only a little bit though, most of their suffering is brought onto their heads by their own unpleasant personalities. They have been lead down this road of crying "genocide', possibly with good intentions, by this foolish Tyr Gwyr Gweryn person. This has set them up with a self defeating agenda, and opened them to national ridicule. No one in their right mind would believe there is the genocide of a national group going on in the UK in 2012. The British are proud of their opposition to genocide world wide. To claim what is happening in Cornwall is "genocide" is seen as insulting to people's intelligence, morals and belief. So claiming "genocide" just makes the nationalists looks foolish and insulting. When we see what has recently happened in Syria, or remembering Rwanda, Armenia, Sudan, and Bosnia, that the nationalists claim some sort of similarity occurs in Cornwall, not only is grossly insulting to the victims of mass murder, but reflects on the stark staring bonkersness of the nationalist. The other side of this coin is, well who wants to join in with people who seem to do nothing but cry "we are victims", "we are oppressed," "we are subjugated"? The only people who want to be seen as victims are the feckless, the losers, and the weak. Who would voluntarily join that brigade? Cornwall is a (beautiful) county of England. People move into Cornwall, people move out of Cornwall. Cultures and traditions are upheld by those who enjoy them and have the time and money to indulge in them. Cornwall is no different to any other English county in that respect. When the nationalists have something positive to offer, when they have plans and costed objectives, when they stop doing Cornwall down, and start building Cornishness up, then they may get some support. But crying "genocide" and having a victim mentally, is not attractive, is not positive and does more to expose them to ridicule and to lessen their chances of support than anything that "the English" do.

  • Slimslad  |  April 07 2012, 12:10PM

    "The treatment of Africa down the ages, by England, has been disgraceful, no doubt. But not Cornwall."

  • Big_Ger  |  April 07 2012, 12:50PM

    So, more chest beating and claims of victimhood by the nationalists, but, plans for doing anything about it? None! More blather about things which have happened in the dim and distant past outside of Cornwall, and, relevance to Cornwall 2012? Nil! No wonder no one wants to join them!! Keep whining about how you are victims, keep complaining that no one will set the world to how you want it, keep blaming others for your miserable and downtrodden lives. But don't expect us Cornish to join you. We're too busy living in England's best county, Kernow!!

  • KernowGB  |  April 07 2012, 1:03PM

    Slimslad, your mindless repetition of denial, will never justify why you, or the rest of the 'flawed four' think that Cornwall, of all places, would have escaped the rapacious tendencies of the Imperial political mind, which you seem to support, with all its evil intent. None of you have never come back on the points regarding the blatantly official lies about the Cornish constitutional position and the many other factors, which clearly go to prove that Cornwall has been, and is still the 'victim' of an evil that is amongst the worst that one group can inflict upon another. All it takes to resolve it, is a bit of integrity and honesty at the upper echelons of the UK multinational State. It is that simple! However, that means that they would have to admit to the lies and deception that is leading to the destruction of the Cornish Nation and the misappropriation of Cornish Territory. The fact that your little group are incapable of grasping basic information is, as I have already pointed out, down to officially contrived groupthink leading to Cognitive Dissonance, when faced with conflicting information and evidence. This is obvious because you are unable to bring forward any 'real' evidence to contradict what has been placed before you. This is irrespective of whether others, more aware than yourselves, feel able, or willing, to act upon such key knowledge relating to their position. Basically the reason for that is that they are, similarly, trapped into groupthink and feel obliged to pursue a path that is officially stacked against them. It has to be done on 'Cornish' terms and not 'English' (or British) terms. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW!

  • Slimslad  |  April 07 2012, 1:10PM

    " By Slimslad's own admission". Not an "admission" at all. The fact of Empire, whether it be Chinese, Persian, Greek, Roman, Russian, British or whatever. Cruelty toward the people of the nations that become part of your Empire.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 07 2012, 1:25PM

    by Big_Ger "I must admit that I feel sorry for the nationalists, only a little bit though, most of their suffering is brought onto their heads by their own unpleasant personalities. They have been lead down this road of crying "genocide', possibly with good intentions, by this foolish Tyr Gwyr Gweryn person. This has set them up with a self defeating agenda, and opened them to national ridicule." Only to add, it is only because of those who are prepared to stand up against these BNP and EDL types that they are exposed for what they are. Just look at their own forum, they did not listen, they banned anyone that dared to have an alternative opinion, and there has been many true good Cornish that have gone that way, and that forum is now receiving its just reward.

  • KernowGB  |  April 07 2012, 2:04PM

    There is clearly no original thought from any of the 'flawed four', so they continually attempt to divert attention to other things that they can have a personal whinge about. Sad indeed. One for the road: It was a British Government Minister {Tony Wedgewood Benn}, when conceding to the French spelling for Concorde in the mid-70s, at the end of the Franco-British aero-project, who gave his reasons as: "...because the 'e' stood for ... Efficiency... Entente... and England." My dictionary definition of 'entente cordiale' gives: "the alliance between France and England, formed in 1904..." This wilfully contrived synonymy between the terms 'England' and 'Britain' - I have never heard of any official repudiation to such usage? - are further represented by the use of the 'Anglo-' hybrid phrases [phrases such as Anglo-Irish, Anglo-French, Anglo-American, Anglo-Saxon] which gives England its continuing Imperial dominance over the minority nations within what one may have thought, naïvely, was a legally constituted multinational State... called 'Britain'! Of course, none of this had any effect upon the Cornish in non-English Cornwall, did it? STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW!

  • Slimslad  |  April 07 2012, 3:48PM

    "Kernow was England's first colony." Source?

  • Slimslad  |  April 07 2012, 3:50PM

    "That is me done!" "One for the road". The long goodbye?

  • Slimslad  |  April 07 2012, 3:53PM

    Native/American Italian/American Spanish/American Chinese/American

  • KernowGB  |  April 07 2012, 4:40PM

    Slimslad, Interesting, is it not, that you never supply any information, yet you continually request others to provide some, plus two further spamming posts, with text but no explanation of why or what you seek to imply. How about the following in response to your first one: ---------------------------------- 1 - ASC 926 Extract: - "This year appeared fiery lights in the northern part of the firmament; and Sihtric departed; and King Athelstan took to the kingdom of Northumbria, and governed all the kings that were in this island: -- First, Howel, King of West-Wales…….." 2 - ASC 942 extract: - "Here Edmund king, of Angles lord, protector of friends 3 - Edmund's Charter of 944: - "King of the English and ruler of this province of the Britons" 4 - Could add more to show the special relationship that Cornwall had to the English Crown leading to the 'restoration', in 1337, of the Duchy of Cornwall - "over which awhile ago Dukes for a long time successively presided as chief rulers." because he was, "desiring that places of note of the same kingdom should be adorned with their pristine honors" --------------------------------------------------- An observation on the second one: The 'Flawed-Four (minus 1) could not resist further promoting its boring and unenlightening playground invective ----------------------------------------------------- An observation on the third one: You left out Cornish/American -------------------------------------------------------

  • Slimslad  |  April 07 2012, 5:36PM

    "The Flawed-Four" Oh, how we larfed! I notice that the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle was demoted to A.S.C.? Can one not abide the fact that one's history was recorded, (in fragments, and copied), by those damned Germanics?

  • EverEngland  |  April 07 2012, 6:12PM

    Proud to be English. Time to make a change and to join the English Defence League and keep England safe for our future generations. http://tinyurl.com/3bpukvd

  • EverEngland  |  April 07 2012, 6:13PM

    If, like us and the many other tens of thousands of decent patriotic people in the country, you are fed up with Islamic Extremism, Islamism and our governments spineless inability to address the issues, then join the world's biggest protest group and help us to make a positive change for the better. http://tinyurl.com/3bpukvd

  • Slimslad  |  April 07 2012, 6:30PM

    "EverEngland", you are a part of the silliest, most distasteful, group since Mosley and his Blackshirts.

  • EverEngland  |  April 07 2012, 6:50PM

    I take it you mean war hero, SIR Oswald Mosely, a man ahead of his time?

  • Slimslad  |  April 07 2012, 7:40PM

    "SIR Oswald Mosely" Fascist, traitor, and all round little pip-squeak1

  • youngcornwall  |  April 07 2012, 7:59PM

    by Slimslad "I have heard, yc, that a former MK councillor actually owns C24?" Not surprising Slimslad. Not a very good advert for Cornwall I would say, having said that it is a good job they are out in the publics eye, with some of the outbursts of late, you couldn't make it up, I dread to think what goes on behind closed doors.

  • Myghal  |  April 07 2012, 10:58PM

    More misinformation? MK have absolutely no control over Cornwall24. It was the property of Cornish World magazine and is owned by a private individual. The only thing you could't make up youngcornwall is how you are utterly obsessed with Cornwall24. Did you ever try collecting stamps? MK instead have a brand new website. Talking of obsession, I am surprised Bigger hasn't checked it out yet.

  • Slimslad  |  April 08 2012, 9:17AM

    "MK have absolutely no control over Cornwall24." Who said anything about MK having "control"

  • youngcornwall  |  April 08 2012, 9:18AM

    @Myghal Not "obsessed" as such, more like going to the root of the problem, I see you still post on there, and thanks for the info about c24.

  • KernowGB  |  April 08 2012, 12:17PM

    by Slimslad - Saturday, April 07 2012, 6:31PM "I have heard, yc, that a former MK councillor actually owns C24?" -------------------------------------------------------------- More speculation and hearsay, and yet more off topic comment? You had better watch out, or yc will suggest that you start a new thread -------------------- (q.v. By youngcornwall - Thursday, March 29 2012, 12:34PM) Well start a new thread, this thread is about Genocide. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- by youngcornwall - Saturday, April 07 2012, 7:59PM "by Slimslad "I have heard, yc, that a former MK councillor actually owns C24?" Not surprising Slimslad. Not a very good advert for Cornwall I would say, having said that it is a good job they are out in the publics eye, with some of the outbursts of late, you couldn't make it up, I dread to think what goes on behind closed doors." --------------------------------------------------- Blindly accepting 'hearsay' says a lot about you yc. You are not the same person talking to each other, are you? You may well query what goes on behind closed doors, but you should accept that corruption is where 'the Power is'. If the Crown & UK Government were more honest and transparent, you would be getting official answers to 'your pretend' topic question. What is the problem with disclosure on Devolution? http://tinyurl.com/cmv9ben Once again if the conversion does not work, you can go direct to the website and search on devolution.

  • Big_Ger  |  April 08 2012, 12:45PM

    So when are the nationalists ever going to do anything about this is genocide? Anything? Ever?

  • KernowGB  |  April 08 2012, 2:56PM

    Be assured that what can be done is being done (and has been for a long time!) and the fact that you, and your friends cannot recognise or acknowledge that fact will not change the natural progress to truth. You have picked on something that is unstoppable, and rather late in the day. Changing understanding and perceptions, through objective knowledge is is an organic process that leads to ever more research and enlightenment. The more it is discussed, the quicker it will spread and succeed. It only needs individuals to travel that extra bit to be able to explain the little 'mysteries' that academia have failed to take notice of - possibly because of Groupthink and/or vested interest!

  • youngcornwall  |  April 08 2012, 2:56PM

    @Big_Ger No Big_Ger, no doubt the nats will try another ploy to attract attention, something the Cornish do not want or desire, saying that, it appears that there are those who do not take too kindly to the nats and their ridiculous genocide accusations being aired on this forum, to the point of starting a new thread to discuss such matters, without me adding anything further to that thread myself, I would say. Turning the other way and not calling these nats to book, just leaves things to fester, and you can be rest assured there will be a hothead or two amongst them that will take it that little bit too far. http://tinyurl.com/ckf2qfw /discussion-15747236-detail/discussion.html

  • KernowGB  |  April 08 2012, 3:07PM

    Umm...m Who was it that started this thread to get to the truth?

  • Slimslad  |  April 08 2012, 5:03PM

    "No more advertising revenue generated by me!"(in this incarnation, anyway).

  • youngcornwall  |  April 08 2012, 5:55PM

    by Myghal "I think it was you 'ridiculous' youngcornwall who started this thread!!!! You are utterly unbelievable." Thanks for that Myghal, flushing out is a knack, I think the public have enough to be going on with now don't you. Which only leaves one thing, are you still on the fence over this Cornish genocide after all that has been said on the topic? by Myghal Sunday, March 18 2012, 7:11PM "I don't actually say whether I believe in Cornish Genocide or not, do I?"

  • Slimslad  |  April 08 2012, 6:19PM

    Back to the misty moors, in a kilt, (circa 1956).

  • youngcornwall  |  April 08 2012, 7:40PM

    by Myghal "My vote is for MK!" There you have it folks, Myghal just saying enough without going the whole hog and letting us know if he backs the Cornish genocide theory or not, but clear enough where his allegiance lies. So not too late yet for him, see how easy it is to get roped in with this kind of genocide nonsense.

  • danwill74  |  April 08 2012, 11:04PM

    These discussions sound incredibly bizarre at times. The problem with small nationalisms is they tend to be incredibly myopic. If you're looking for an example of genuine genocide in these islands then William The Conqueror's Harrying Of The North in 1069-70 on the Anglo-Scandinavian population of Yorkshire and other northern counties. The death toll is estimated to be around 100,000 and land was put out of use for generations. You have to bear in mind the population of the country at the time to realise just how high that figure is. It's been compared with the killing fields of Cambodia. The problem is when you begin with any kind of hardline nationalist mindset is you perceive history and events purely by a singular narrative that distorts and limits your field of vision. Cornish self-determination is valid (likewise for any other region or self-perceived nation in the UK) but the more you inflate the rhetoric the more bizarre you sound.

  • danwill74  |  April 08 2012, 11:08PM

    These discussions sound incredibly bizarre at times. The problem with small nationalisms is they tend to be incredibly myopic. If you're looking for an example of genuine genocide in these islands then William The Conqueror's Harrying Of The North in 1069-70 on the Anglo-Scandinavian population of Yorkshire and other northern counties. The death toll is estimated to be around 100,000 and land was put out of use for generations. You have to bear in mind the population of the country at the time to realise just how high that figure is. It's been compared with the killing fields of Cambodia. The problem is when you begin with any kind of hardline nationalist mindset is you perceive history and events purely by a singular narrative that distorts and limits your field of vision. Cornish self-determination is valid (likewise for any other region or self-perceived nation in the UK) but the more you inflate the rhetoric the more bizarre you sound. Was Thatcher's war on the northern miners genocide for instance ?

  • Big_Ger  |  April 08 2012, 11:09PM

    So, for the fifth time of asking; when are the nationalists ever going to do anything about this genocide? KernowGB pretends that "what can be done is being done", laughably though he is unable to say what this is. If he really thinks that the unpleasant personalities who make up the nationalist movement are capable of "changing understanding and perceptions" by their constant playing the victim card, then there is no wonder why all they do is fail. Now they have Mike back here, their work is going to be made even harder. Not that any more was necessary, but have you seen a better example of "tin foil hat" conspiracy theorist baloney than; "the little 'mysteries' that academia have failed to take notice of - possibly because of Groupthink and/or vested interest!"? Look up "academia" in the dictionary, there's a good boy.

  • danwill74  |  April 08 2012, 11:09PM

    These discussions sound incredibly bizarre at times. The problem with small nationalisms is they tend to be incredibly myopic. If you're looking for an example of genuine genocide in these islands then William The Conqueror's Harrying Of The North in 1069-70 on the Anglo-Scandinavian population of Yorkshire and other northern counties. The death toll is estimated to be around 100,000 and land was put out of use for generations. You have to bear in mind the population of the country at the time to realise just how high that figure is. It's been compared with the killing fields of Cambodia. The problem is when you begin with any kind of hardline nationalist mindset is you perceive history and events purely by a singular narrative that distorts and limits your field of vision. Cornish self-determination is valid (likewise for any other region or self-perceived nation in the UK) but the more you inflate the rhetoric the more bizarre you sound. Was Thatcher's war on the northern miners genocide for instance ?

  • KernowGB  |  April 09 2012, 11:03AM

    Must have been peak user time around 11:00pm last evening and the forum is creaking at the seams. A post from me never got through - or was deleted?? - and danwill74 had 3 almost identical posts. Good to see someone with an intelligent response to which I shall respond to later today. In the meantime @Big_Ger: by Big_Ger - Sunday, April 08 2012, 11:09PM Look up "academia" in the dictionary, there's a good boy." --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What is your point? There's a good boy!

  • KernowGB  |  April 09 2012, 1:53PM

    @ danwill74 - re Sunday, April 08 2012, 11:09PM You qualify your opening statement with rather emotive terms such as "incredibly bizzare", "small" nationalisms and with a tendency to be "incredibly myopic". Such terms surely demand some form of explanation as to what they are actually intended to mean in practice, given that the words themselves are understood, because each are contentious from a particular individual's standpoint. I would suggest that in fact, invariably, my posts represent a focussed view on a specific event and group, in response to perceived wrongs to that group by others in power. Therefore, not at all myopic. There is no presumed superiority over others or attempts to impose the group's values on others and is always argued from a position that rejects external coercion and not promoted from an imperialistic power-base, which may be defined as "Greater State Chauvinism". It is, in fact, a rejection of that chauvinism that now leads the Council of Europe to redefine historical nations as "cultural nations". There is no intention to draw any comparisons with others, contemporaneous or historical, because each case is unique to that group. The intention is to draw attention to only those factors that support the argument. Once again, you feel the need to add a qualifier "genuine" to the word genocide, but there is only 'Genocide', which is itself only further qualified by the specific method used to achieve it. You are quite correct in what you say, regarding the Harrying of the North, but I would place an even larger example in front of you and that is the earlier displacement of the 'British' identity with an 'English' identity, as a supposedly handfull of Anglo-Saxons expanded its power-base across British territory. It is undoubtedly true that genocide has existed throughout the world since the concept of greed came into being, but it has only been a matter of international law since 1948 and my argument is not based on what has gone before, but what is happening to Cornwall now, and in the past few centuries, for reasons I have given in the posts above, and which, in my opinion, still represents what has gone on in this island since about the middle of the 5th century. I must admit to having a specific (focussed) mindset, but would argue that it in no way limits my field of vision. It is not a subject that one takes too lightly, for obvious reasons, but a presentation of the facts and what I feel are conclusive examples of culpability should stand on its own merits. If it is considered to be hardline, then that is because the powers that be have shown themselves to be arrogant and dismissive, over many decades of campaigning, to acknowledge and recognise the de jure constitutional position of Cornwall, and continue to proceed with policies that threaten the territorial integrity and rights of the Cornish people even further. Let's call a spade a spade. If an argument is considered to be "inflated rhetoric" then surely there must be an argument against it so that a proper discussion may follow and a mutually agreed position achieved. Totally bemused by your question re "Thatcher's war on miners".

  • Slimslad  |  April 09 2012, 4:37PM

    "You are quite correct in what you say, regarding the Harrying of the North, but I would place an even larger example in front of you and that is the earlier displacement of the 'British' identity with an 'English' identity, as a supposedly handfull of Anglo-Saxons expanded its power-base across British territory." Where is the "earlier example"?

  • Slimslad  |  April 09 2012, 4:45PM

    "Totally bemused by your question re "Thatcher's war on miners"." Really? Thatcher attacked the very "glue" that held mining communities together. Stick to your books.

  • Slimslad  |  April 09 2012, 5:42PM

    The Harrying of the North was "genocide". 100,000 murders.

  • EverEngland  |  April 09 2012, 8:21PM

    "Which gives me the right to say that some "ex armed forces personnel" are thick as two short planks. Cannon fodder for little Nazis like you" ( Slimslad April 07 2012, 6:40PM) The disgusting posting made by poster Slimslad who having made this disgraceful remark goes on to claim that he has served his Country. Utterly despicable.

  • Slimslad  |  April 09 2012, 8:34PM

    "Some".

  • KernowGB  |  April 10 2012, 9:05AM

    Slimslad, are you completely incapable of comprehending anything that is written?

  • JoyRedruth  |  April 10 2012, 11:16AM

    Home Rule for Kernow by the way!!!

  • KernowGB  |  April 10 2012, 1:20PM

    @Big_Ger - re: Tuesday, April 10 2012, 10:16AM You clearly suffer from the same problem as Slimslad, because I was responding to Slimslad's 3-post latest exposition of ignorance - in response to my posting at Monday, April 09 2012, 1:53PM. I am not interested in responding to, or discussing, the EDL, because that is 'off-topic' and should have been queried by yc a long time ago. However, I fully understand why your little group does its best to keep the thread off-topic. That has been obvious for a very long time indeed. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW!

  • JoyRedruth  |  April 10 2012, 2:28PM

    My postings and yours Kernow GB are now left without Big ger's postings as Big ger's postings have been removed from here and elsewhere.

  • KernowGB  |  April 10 2012, 4:25PM

    Good to see that there is some moderation on the msg board.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 10 2012, 6:19PM

    by Big_Ger "So, for the fifth time of asking; when are the nationalists ever going to do anything about this genocide?" So I see this thread is still going, to the detriment of the Cornish people and MK which only makes them a laughing stock, now that everything is out into the open. What can the nationalists do BG you ask, lets be realistic, TGG is trying his best and keeps sidestepping your question because he does not know "how long is a piece of sting".

  • JoyRedruth  |  April 10 2012, 6:58PM

    I am glad you repeat Bigger's posts youngcornwall as the ones he puts up keep disappearing. What on earth has this thread which you commenced got to do with MK? You obviously don't read the actual newspaper because if you did you would know that MK membership is increasing substantially as a result of many things recently. I am not an MK member btw but I certainly vote for the party. Nor do I see anywhere that KernowGB is a member or claims to speak for MK. You don't half talk a load of rubbish. Do try to keep up.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 10 2012, 7:40PM

    "What on earth has this thread which you commenced got to do with MK?" MK Nationalists… Genocide nationalist's invention…MK tarred with the same brush if they do not distance themselves from this ludicrous nats Cornish Genocide.

  • KernowGB  |  April 10 2012, 8:41PM

    by youngcornwall - Tuesday, April 10 2012, 7:40PM ""What on earth has this thread which you commenced got to do with MK?" MK Nationalists… Genocide nationalist's invention…MK tarred with the same brush if they do not distance themselves from this ludicrous nats Cornish Genocide." ------------------------------------------------------------------- Not only your arguments, but also your perception of 'nationalists' is totally flawed. In fact, the expose of Cornish Genocide is solely the due to the investigations and research of a hypothesis developed by Tyr-Gwyr-Gweryn in seeking to explain the Cornish Paradox, which is self evident from that organisation's website, and the fact that no one else argues the concept, particularly the group that you seem to wish to implicate with your denial, yet provide no substantive evidence or proof. They do not need to distance themselves, because they have never been a part of the discussion or research. That, of course, is their loss as is also the de jure constitutional position of the Duchy, which they avoid like the plague. Essentially, as an organisation, it fails to take advantage of the political tools that are available, because they have some strange faith in UK democracy - despite the UK's Democratic Deficit proven yet again over the current Border issue and a presumed equality of a vote by manipulating communities into arbitrarily contrived constituencies. It is obvious that the TGG site operates from the historic position of Cornwall as one of the original nations of this Island, for which the label of 'nationalist' might apply, but the TGG site has never participated in any political discussion with regard to the political future of our nation and country. That is a matter for the sovereignty of the Cornish people within their own territory free from external coercion and arbitrary controls as exists with the status quo. If you ever have the wit to comprehend what I have been saying and what is also contained within the TGG website, you may just become aware that it has no political content whatsoever, just opinion and facts, which people are free to digest and pursue further as is their need. You have all had the opportunity to expand your knowledge, but all you have attempted to do is to implicate others, and failed miserably, because you are not being honest with yourselves or anyone else. I can assure you that I am not a member of MK, nor am I a member of any 'English' political party, but I will invariably vote for MK, because they are the only way forward for a truly inclusive 'Cornish' future.

  • KernowGB  |  April 11 2012, 10:29AM

    Another illogical post, considering the amount of 'bogus' diversionary opposition posts on this particular thread?

  • KernowGB  |  April 12 2012, 11:32AM

    A conundrum for the 'bogus' truth-seekers: Where did the 'British' Government derive its legitimacy to change the status of Cornwall from a Royal Duchy to an administrative 'English' county at the end of the 19th century? One of the posts above illustrates the Duchy's proof that legally, it was the 'County of Cornwall' (Comitatus) that was augmented to a duchy forever, without being given elsewhere, and the first item enumerated in the Great Charter was the shrievalty (vicecomitatus) of Cornwall which, with other things enumerated, was "annexed and united to the Duchy forever". Also, as part of its evidence, the Duchy asserted that: ---------------------- It is, moreover, submitted that the three Duchy Charters are sufficient in themselves to vest in the Dukes of Cornwall, not only the government of Cornwall, but the entire territorial dominion in and over the county which had previously been vested in the Crown, with all such royal prerogatives as would naturally accompany, and the enjoyment of which would only be consistent with a grant of so high a character, including most, if not all, of the rights and privileges enjoyed by the owner of a County Palatine, - for, on inspecting these charters, it will be found that not only all the territorial possessions of the Crown in Cornwall but every prerogative right and source of revenue (except royal jurisdiction, and it may be ecclesiastical patronage) were granted or confirmed to the Duchy by one or other of these charters. ------------------------------------- ITCONCLUDED ITS PRELIMINARY ARGUMENT WITH: -------------------------------------- In conclusion, it is submitted that the facts and authorities before referred to are sufficient to establish,- 1st. That Cornwall, like Wales, was at the time of the Conquest, and was subsequently treated in many respects, as distinct from England. 2nd. That it was held by the Earls of Cornwall with the rights and prerogatives of a County Palatine, as far as regarded the Seignory or territorial dominion. 3rd. That the Dukes of Cornwall have from the creation of the Duchy enjoyed the rights and prerogatives of a County Palatine, as far as regarded seignory or territorial dominion, and that to a greater extent than bad been enjoyed by the Earls. 4th. That when the Earldom was augmented into a Duchy, the circumstances attending its creation, as well as the language of the Duchy Charter, not only support and confirm the natural presumption, that the new and higher title was to be accompanied with at least as great dignity, power, and prerogative as the Earls had enjoyed, but also afford evidence that the Duchy was to be invested with still more extensive rights and privileges. And lastly. That the Duchy Charters have always been construed and treated, not merely by the Courts of Judicature, but also by the Legislature of the Country, as having vested in the Dukes of Cornwall the whole territorial interest and dominion of the Crown in and over the entire County of Cornwall. Duchy of Cornwall,Somerset House,May, 1855. --------------------------------------------------------- The consequence of this bit of 'ILLEGAL' constitutional chicanery is that it had the objective of hiding the true constitutional position of the Duke of Cornwall with regard to his territorial Duchy of Cornwall and immediately removed a crucial identity marker of the historic Cornish nation. The inevitable corrosive effect upon that nation's future existence is what the topic of this thread is about. So, to all those that care, where did the 'British' Government derive its legitimacy to degrade the existence of the people of the Cornish Nation? Where are the legal documents and written records of how this constitutional change was agreed and implemented, bearing in mind Edmund Burke's failed attempt in 1780 to merge the "five principalities" into the Crown because the Duke of Cornwall was not old enough to defend his rights?

  • KernowGB  |  April 14 2012, 1:28PM

    The illegal imposition of 'English' administrative 'county' and its 'corrosive' effect upon the perceptions of Cornwall and the Cornish people, has been a critical factor in furthering the process of Cornish Genocide. It is a well-known fact that today, people have been brainwashed into referring to their country as the county and that Cornwall is fast disappearing from their vocabulary. In a similar way, there seems to be a mindless desire to also replace the descriptive word Cornish with a grammatically incorrect use of the term Cornwall. Whilst a favourite pasttime of internet and media trolls, it is even more insidiously commonplace within spontaneous conversation by the gullible and the media, as they fail to acknowledge their true historic identity and relationship to the place. The word county is a modern equivalent of the historic word vicecomitatus (aka Shrievalty, Sheriffdom). However, its modern terminology is also a direct translation of comitatus (aka Earldom, County), where the County is the territory presided over by an Earl (or Count), whereas 'vicecomitatus' is the territory under the jurisdiction of the Sheriff. In Cornwall, the Sheriff was the principal officer of the Earls and Dukes. In England the Sheriff was the principal officer of the King.

  • KernowGB  |  April 14 2012, 1:30PM

    In the 1850s, the legal counsel of the Duchy of Cornwall felt it necessary to explain the meaning of 'County' with regard to Cornwall, namely: ------------------------------------------------------- To prevent a, misconception which is likely to arise from the description of this possession as " the County of Cornwall," it will be necessary accurately to define what is meant by this expression ; the division of the kingdom into, counties by Alfred was for the purposes of civil government and the administration of justice. A county simply as such was unconnected with the tenure of land as established in this country after the Norman Conquest. To say that lands were holden as of a county taken simply as above, would therefore be an unmeaning expression. All lands in England were presumed to be held originally of the King in capite as of his crown, or in other words, the Realm of England was a great seignory in the Crown, as of which lands were holden ; and Madox states that in this there were many subordinate seignories – to wit, honors and baronies (Mad. Exch. vol. 1. p. 107,) and lands were held of the chief Lords of these honors or baronies in capite as of their honors or baronies, in the same way that lands were held in capite of the King " ut de corona." When, therefore, we find lands mentioned as being held as of a county "ut de comitatu" it follows that the word county is not used in its simple sense, meaning a division of the kingdom for the purposes of civil government, &c.., but as denoting also an honor or land barony, to which the tenure of land was incident, and if such an honor became vested in the Crown, the lands would be held in capite of the Crown but still "ut de honore in manu Regis existente." See the authorities quoted in "The Duke of Beaufort v. The Mayor of Swansea," 3 Exch. nep. 416 ; see also Madox's Baron. Angl. We find the County of Cornwall very frequently mentioned in this way. It appears from the 3rd Charter to Queen Isabella, that the fees of the County of Cornwall were not confined to the limits of that county, taken simply as a division of the kingdom, for the purposes of civil government, but extended into other counties, which would be inexplicable under any other construction than that the County of Cornwall was an honor or land barony, of which lands in other counties were parcel : see also 1 Madd. Exch. p. 642, where, treating of Earl Reginald having been charged for scutage, he states that he was charged but was acquitted of it, because his honor or barony was then in the King's hands. The Grants, therefore, of the Comitatus CornubiÅ to the Earls of Cornwall must be taken to be not of the County of Cornwall simply as a division of the kingdom, made for the purposes of civil government, &c., which is the sense in which, in the Grants of the Comitatus ordinarily made to Sheriffs, the word is to be understood, but as a Territorial Grant, comprising a great honor or land barony, of or to which lands situate in other Counties might be parcel or appertain. It appears also from numerous documents, that the possession of this honor, called the County of Cornwall, conferred upon its possessor the lordship of the territory from which the honor derived its name, which territory was called the "terra de Cornubia," and comprised, as against the Crown, the territorial ownership of the County generally ; that is to say, of the whole County, with the exception of some particular estates, such as the Terra Regis, &c.

  • KernowGB  |  April 14 2012, 4:23PM

    The following link presents an interesting legal perspective on the 'broader' approach to genocide, as it may be shown to apply in the case of the destruction of the Cornish people. http://tinyurl.com/c2qfdbb Its main focus is on the Australian treatment of the Aboriginal children, but the argument is very pertinent with respect to showing culpability with regard to treatment that can be shown to be applicable to the Cornish people and, in particular the deculturation of Cornish children.

  • trelawneyone  |  April 14 2012, 7:23PM

    why o why are there so many people up in arms when someone mentions kernow kernewek or anything appertaining to kernow?it was a country in its own right all i am going to say is look at the british empire most of the overrun countries have got their independance which they could not do fast enough and a lot have not really got a lot of time for gb as they remember the past treatment kernow faired no better these critics should read their history books.

  • KernowGB  |  April 15 2012, 4:38PM

    Having read all the posts on this thread, as I hope open-minded browsers will, It would now be worth comparing two websites. The first is the official Duchy of Cornwall website at, http://tinyurl.com/ydp2hoe , and the second at, http://tinyurl.com/8a6urho , is a more objective and honest look at the truth behind the official facade of lies, deception and misrepresentation of both Cornwall and the Cornish people - with its consequences. It will be interesting to note that the official website, whilst now a '.org' site was, in the not too distant past a '.gov.uk' site. Possibly some switched-on official saw the inconsistency of a 'private' (sic) estate posted under a Government domain name - particularly since it had obviously hijacked a constitutional title for a commercial(?) business.

  • Slimslad  |  April 15 2012, 5:16PM

    "why o why are there so many people up in arms when someone mentions kernow kernewek or anything appertaining to kernow?" "So many people"? Where? "Up in arms"? Who is? "these critics should read their history books."? Written by whom?

  • KernowGB  |  April 15 2012, 8:16PM

    Slimslad, still asking questions, but still answering none. Predictably consistent, I suppose. Presumably some basic answers to basic questions should suffice: Q1 - Where? A1 - Out there. Q2 - Who is? A2 - Those with Cognitive Dissonance. Q3 - Written by whom? A3 - Those without Cognitive Dissonance.

  • Myghal  |  April 15 2012, 8:50PM

    Slimslad is just not worth bothering with KernowGB. He doesn't understand that we vote differently at different levels in Cornwall just as they do in Scotland and Wales, he doesn't know the answer to a few basic questions about Cornwall, in fact, he doesn't even live in Cornwall.

  • KernowGB  |  April 15 2012, 10:20PM

    I agree, Myghal, but he always provides a 'too good to miss' opportunity to reinforce another point about his failure to engage. I am sure no one is fooled by his rather obvious negative agenda.

  • Slimslad  |  April 16 2012, 8:00AM

    "He doesn't understand that we vote differently at different levels in Cornwall just as they do in Scotland and Wales" Comparing M.K. with the S.N.P. and Plaid Cymru, perhaps? What a laugh that is!

  • KernowGB  |  April 16 2012, 10:13AM

    Slimslad, even though you continually attempt to 'deny' or 'denigrate' the comments of others, or as in your last post to divert the thread off-topic, you may care to reflect upon the words of Jonathan Edward's, the Plaid Cymru delegate's, from his address to the MK Conference last November. (my highlighting in uppercase text): ------------------------------ "Addressing the English question is a key element of this process. Here lies the opportunity for the national party of Cornwall. Your message has never been more relevant. In this rapidly changing economic and political landscape YOUR DETERMINATION TO SECURE POLITICAL RECOGNITION FOR THE CORNISH PEOPLE AND A FAIRER ECONOMIC DEAL IS AHEAD OF THE CURVE OF HISTORY. As the great civil rights activist Cesar Chavez said in a slightly different context "Once social change begins, it cannot be reversed. You can not uneducate the person who has learned to read. You cannot humiliate the person who feels pride. You cannot oppress the people who are not afraid anymore. We have seen the future, and the future is ours." Diolch yn fawr. " ----------------------------------- There is everything to play for and and the final comment, in the above quoted extract, is a truism that you cannot divert or denigrate with any success of changing progress. So, back on topic: STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE!

  • Slimslad  |  April 16 2012, 4:43PM

    Not "comments". Reams and reams of "proof" and quotes from others.

  • KernowGB  |  April 16 2012, 6:42PM

    by Slimslad - Monday, April 16 2012, 4:43PM "Not "comments". Reams and reams of "proof" and quotes from others." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whatever that is intended to mean in 'plain English', it is still clear to all that you are unable to engage in a proper debate to counter what is being said. However you like to denigrate what has been posted "proof" still equals PROOF and the quotes from 'others' destroys your narrow POV that you continually peddle. Simply because you are unable to cope with it, does not make any of the evidence or argument that I have posted above in any way incorrect. In fact, imho, you now have a public duty to prove me wrong or retire gracefully. Alternatively you must accept that your stance eminently provides an indicator of your own complicity in the process of Cornish Genocide and, as with the actions of others, is proof that a process of genocide exists. (q.v. by KernowGB - Tuesday, March 27 2012, 12:42PM) To quote an extract of Lemkin's definition above (at Tuesday, March 27 2012, 11:11AM): --------------------- "Genocide is directed against the national group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in their individual capacity, but as members of the national group." ----------------------

  • Slimslad  |  April 16 2012, 6:47PM

    Not Lemkin again?

  • KernowGB  |  April 16 2012, 8:21PM

    Oh Dear! Not even sure of that. Eh? Par for the course!

  • Slimslad  |  April 16 2012, 8:31PM

    Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (New York, 9 December 1948) http://tinyurl.com/6owebg9 Law, not Lemkin.

  • KernowGB  |  April 17 2012, 10:54AM

    Naughty boy! Now go back to the post by KernowGB - Monday, March 26 2012, 8:49PM, and start reading again and try to understand the difference between what Genocide truly is and not simply that bit of a much broader concept and discussion that suits your narrow purpose of 'denial'. All the answers are there for your edification. Then write out 1000 times 'Slimslad must learn to concentrate'!

  • Slimslad  |  April 17 2012, 11:52AM

    "try to understand the difference between what Genocide truly is and not simply that bit of a much broader concept and discussion that suits your narrow purpose of 'denial'." Or what fits in with a narrow theory that some would love to to be "de jur", (I think is a popular phrase?)

  • Slimslad  |  April 17 2012, 12:08PM

    I do beg your pardon! Of course I meant "de jure".

  • KernowGB  |  April 17 2012, 12:35PM

    Not surprisingly that there is still no substantive comment to support your prejudice, but just for the benefit of others, I restate Lemkin's definition of Genocide, which is the starting point of any discussion on the subject of Genocide. There are many other posts above, in fact, that confirm that observation, including one that lists the many other treaties that have been initiated, subsequently, to provide for the 1948 limitation that you so clearly seem so obsessed with. If you would comply, I would also suggest that you should write out another 1000 lines that: "Slimslad, should refrain from attempting to create a circular discussion." -------------------------------------------------- Lemkin's definition (for everyone's consumption and edification) contained in his "Axis Rule in Occupied Europe" (1944) was: "Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups. Genocide is directed against the national group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in their individual capacity, but as members of the national group." "Genocide has two phases: one, destruction of the national pattern of the oppressed group; the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor. This imposition, in turn, may be made upon the oppressed population which is allowed to remain or upon the territory alone, after removal of the population and the colonization by the oppressor's own nationals." [Achieved by a number of "Techniques" listed as]: · Political · Social · Cultural · Economic · Biological · Physical: ······ Endangering Health ······ Mass Killing · Religious · Moral"

  • Slimslad  |  April 17 2012, 1:06PM

    "Slimslad, should refrain from attempting to create a circular discussion."? Or produce a single-source definition.?

  • KernowGB  |  April 17 2012, 3:38PM

    Slimslad, that is a totally ambiguous comment from you, that in truth says nothing. It defies definition/clarification, in response to evidence to illustrate that it is very much an ongoing International discussion, which draws heavily on "Lemkin's definition" derived, as it is, from a lifelong study of the subject, with particular reference to Axis Rule in Occupied Europe. Be brave. Educate yourself. start with this website "preventgenocide" here: http://tinyurl.com/blevbgz Do not miss anything out.

  • Slimslad  |  April 17 2012, 7:36PM

    "Slimslad, that is a totally ambiguous comment from you, that in truth says nothing." "Ambiguous"? it means using a "single source", (in this case, Lemkin), to define, (in this case), genocide.

  • Slimslad  |  April 17 2012, 7:39PM

    Try this to understand the concept of "single-source" http://tinyurl.com/cfg9fqt

  • KernowGB  |  April 17 2012, 8:56PM

    You, as usual, fail to comprehend. Yes! Ambiguous: You consider that my reference to the ultimate "primary source", namely, Lemkin has less significance than your single-source reference to a flawed and narrow, internationally challenged, 1948 Convention on Genocide. Were you originally pointing to my 'single-source' or your own 'single-source'? Your reply has just made it unambiguous. I commend everyone to visit "the FW de Klerk Foundation" website and have a read of its publication "The International Protection of Minority Rights", you might, possibly, get a feel for the amount of material that now exists to fill the gap left by the 1948 Convention, which has the purpose of creating the environment to make the reasons for the 1948 Convention redundant. The real 'pro-active response' to prevent genocide, and the real purpose of Lemkin's definition, rather than a reactive Convention once the worst excesses have already been achieved, because the participating States were not, themselves, necessarily 'sqeaky-clean' on the 'broader' definition. The link to the document, if it works, is: http://tinyurl.com/ceghf88 The main website is: http://tinyurl.com/d8uuu29 then select 'Publications' from the left hand panel and open up "International Protection of Minority Rights" from the publications list

  • Slimslad  |  April 17 2012, 9:05PM

    "You, as usual, fail to comprehend" As do the majority of the population, it seems.

  • KernowGB  |  April 18 2012, 12:26PM

    Slimslad, still nothing to say, other than an open-ended 'diversionary' assertion that once again is meaningless within the context of this thread and its originator's 'pretend' objective. Perhaps you should change your username to 'Sidelinerlad? My next post will put it back 'on-topic' and present a thought for 2012. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW!

  • Gwynnhadu  |  April 18 2012, 6:14PM

    Archeologically speaking, Cornwall is rather different. But it seems from a posting above Slimslad that you are not a resident of Cornwall. What is your interest in Cornwall?

  • Slimslad  |  April 18 2012, 8:21PM

    "You consider that my reference to the ultimate "primary source", namely, Lemkin" "Ultimate"? Lemkin was one several that worked on the draft 1948 Convention on Genocide. Lemkin died a bitter,disappointed man, with much of his own writings and ideas on genocide never recognised or written into law.

  • KernowGB  |  April 18 2012, 11:59PM

    Slimslad, YES! Ultimate! Can you please let everyone know, how you can pick-up on the word "ultimate" from my post of Tuesday, April 17 2012, 8:56PM, totally misrepresent my post, yet fail to relate it to the significance of what else I said in that post. Can you explain to us why you think that such a heroic individual should have ended his days in such an embittered way, or why you should actually seek to downplay his invaluable input to, what became, the flawed, self-interest actions that drew up the 'limited' UN Convention on Genocide? How many lives do you think might have been saved if his research had been 'fully' acted upon since 1933, but especially during the 1940s and beyond? If you want some pointers, please open your mind and re-read everything that I have been saying to you (and others) within this thread, but, especially my post of Tuesday, April 17 2012, 8:56PM and the document link that I specifically referred to in that post, which has a direct connection to your final comment. STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW!

  • Slimslad  |  April 19 2012, 7:21AM

    "please open your mind and re-read everything that I have been saying to you (and others) within this thread, but, especially my post of Tuesday, April 17 2012, 8:56PM and the document link that I specifically referred to in that post, which has a direct connection to your final comment. No thank you, Read it all. Bye! http://tinyurl.com/68p6t8

  • Gwynnhadu  |  April 19 2012, 10:08AM

    The initial Cornish school syllabus was entitles 'A Sense of Place'. I think it very important that you either identify strongly with a certain place or live there to understand that others may not share your views. To just dismiss it in one sentence does seem to say a lot really. It has been pointed out above Slimslad that you apparently do not reside in Cornwall or indeed have any connection with it. What is your interest with it? Historical, archeological? Or are you merely a distant onlooker who is bored?

  • youngcornwall  |  April 19 2012, 10:26AM

    Thank you Slimslad for trying to save the Cornish people from this unnecessary genocide embarrassment, which some keep trying to sell us, like many more I turned off some time back. Coming up to 300 posts on this thread, that is without those postings that have been removed, you can usually tell when they are losing their silly argument, and they get all personal. Those that think they have sufficient evidence regarding this genocide DO something with IT and let us know how you get on, no rush whatsoever.

  • KernowGB  |  April 19 2012, 1:49PM

    by youngcornwall - Thursday, April 19 2012, 10:26AM [...] " like many more I turned off some time back. Coming up to 300 posts on this thread, that is without those postings that have been removed," [...] -------------------------------------------------- That really shows how committed you were in starting this thread. When it got too hot........? Can you quantify 'how many' got "turned off" and for 'what reason. How would you know such information as that, or is it just weasel words? Perhaps you can also quantify how many posts were removed and for what reasons? If truth has some meaning for you? "Coming up to 300 posts" and not one intelligent response from any of you alleged truth-seekers to the argument and evidence that has been posted here. Not even the tiniest concession that any of it has any relevance to the topic. Now that must be a statistical impossibility in any topic searching for the truth. Do you not agree?

  • Gwynnhadu  |  April 19 2012, 1:59PM

    If you feel the way you say you do, Youngcornwall, then why did you commence this thread in the first instance may I ask? Was it to provoke nastiness by any chance? You all appear rather out of your league with KernowGB, even Slimslad who I now understand is from far, far away and has no connections at all with Cornwall!

  • youngcornwall  |  April 19 2012, 3:16PM

    Without feeding the nat trolls anymore than is necessary, I did not ask you to post on this thread, you did so at your own free will, just remember that please. Without dissecting how many this and how many that, only to say I am pleased with the amount of postings, and only to repeat what I said earlier. "Those that think they have sufficient evidence regarding this genocide DO something with IT and let us know how you get on, no rush whatsoever."

  • KernowGB  |  April 19 2012, 4:51PM

    @YoungCornwall (re Thursday, April 19 2012, 3:16PM) That is truly a most shallow and childish example of response avoidance and really quite embarassing. It certainly reveals your agenda behind this thread topic that you started, with the aim of getting to 'the truth'. An agenda that I hinted at in my opening post on Monday, March 26 2012, 8:49PM, above. Since the heat has been turned up, you have consistently been trying to curtail the discussion on this thread and before moving to cooler areas. I have no regrets at posting on this thread, in order to 'call your bluff' (I was under the impression that it was an open forum?) and introduce some argument and evidence to draw-out the reason behind the cosy-quartet's back-slapping negative agenda. For your information, trolls never provide genuine information and argument, but they sure do attempt to fill a thread with 'denial', denigration and diversionary material without any qualification or substantive supporting comment. Oh! That sounds very much like the actions of the cosy-quartet. No surprise there then? You also seem intent on creating an illusion that you are preaching from the moral high-ground and that others (that you seek hard to brand "nats") are the naughty ones. Well, YoungCornwall, the credentials of you and your colleagues do not stand up very well to public scrutiny. I certainly hope that others (just browsing) that read your posts, also track back to see what it is a response to. Perhaps it is now time to politely suggest that you put up, or shut up?

  • youngcornwall  |  April 19 2012, 6:05PM

    My closing comment on my last two postings shows quite clearly that I accept you're hard to swallow laughable opinions on Cornish genocide, which you are entitled to have, which should also go both ways regarding people's opinions, so I say again, go forward with your hair brained idea that the Cornish people are being subjected to some kind genocide today. I will go so far as to say the Cornish people have never been so well off, as they have been in the last 60 odd years or so. So here we are again I repeat, go forward with your hair brained ideas. "Those that think they have sufficient evidence regarding this genocide…. DO something with IT….. and let us know how you get on, no rush whatsoever."

  • KernowGB  |  April 19 2012, 6:37PM

    &YoungCornwall (re Thursday, April 19 2012, 6:05PM) Accepting that I have an opinion (in such clourful terms) is not saying anything other than I have a right to express an opinion. Your opening gambit to this thread was "Cornish Genocide - the Truth" and not as you now seek to say "Cornish Genocide - the Opinion". We are all entitled to hold an opinion, but 'the Truth' is something quite unique. I have called your bluff and put reams of information, argument and evidence - Yes! Even cuipability! - in front of you, and you have not responded directly to any of it. So why then did you start this thread?

  • Slimslad  |  April 19 2012, 7:23PM

    I think yc started this thread, not to "show people up", but to show people how extreme the views and opinions of some fanatics can be. Plus, it highlights quite clearly how rude and personally insulting these fanatics can be. Far from "showing people up", this thread has managed to allow these folk to show themselves up.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 19 2012, 7:51PM

    by KernowGB "Accepting that I have an opinion (in such clourful terms) is not saying anything other than I have a right to express an opinion. Your opening gambit to this thread was "Cornish Genocide - the Truth"" My opening gambit in full if you please….. "Cornish Genocide and the Truth? What do you know or what do you care, do you have an opinion you would like to share?" As you can see "opinion" is the optimum word, then it goes on to say, "opinion you would like to share", share not ram down people's throats, why not let people make their own minds up instead of browbeating your point of view over. With the greatest respect, your take on this is no different than anyone else's, it is an "opinion", and it is what you think to be the truth, nothing more and nothing else. Joy believe what you like.

  • KernowGB  |  April 19 2012, 8:26PM

    @YoungCornwall (re Thursday, April 19 2012, 7:51PM) Your correct subject title was simply "Cornish Genocide and the Truth". However, my apologies for omitting the 'and', but must add that its inclusion reinforces my point even moreso. The rest was part of a wide-ranging invitation for people to post from a position ranging from 'knowledge', 'interest' or 'opinion'. I believe that I have demonstrated 'knowledge' and 'interest' and even, in places, 'opinion'. The cosy-quartet on the other hand have demonstrated nothing but unsubstantiated 'denial', 'denigration' and attempted 'diversion' As for ramming it down people's throats, or browbeating: It is simply information that people can read, or not read. It is everyone's freedom of choice whether they wish to respond. However, if they do, then there should be no surprise, on an open forum, that I can, and will, defend my argument. Can you say the same?

  • Slimslad  |  April 19 2012, 8:40PM

    I think my point about rudeness and insults was well made. (See above).

  • Slimslad  |  April 19 2012, 9:30PM

    Oh dear! i think someone has got the "single source" bug. I may be Slimslad, but I think Slim has other lads. ta-ta!

  • poldice  |  April 20 2012, 9:04AM

    Still chawin the fat be ee'e my andsomes, you pesky varmints ez so at odd ee'es caint even agree to differ, giss on ome to Maither an be gone with ee'e youm bravem gaitin on my nerves stop gaikin back ohver yer shoulders and move on, bettern you use yer backbones than yer bliddy wishbones.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 20 2012, 9:16AM

    by KernowGB "on an open forum, that I can, and will, defend my argument. Can you say the same?" Can't you see I do not have an "argument", your "argument" is getting over what you have read, and what you believe to be the truth, what I do have is an opinion on this Cornish genocide topic and more so now since this thread, that is the nats are clinging to straws, and making fool of themselves in the process, that is my opinion. I am sure others also have their opinions and like me do not wish to get into meaningless never ending arguments, so thanks to those who posted and those for just reading...Have a nice day.

  • KernowGB  |  April 20 2012, 12:15PM

    @ YoungCornwall (re Friday, April 20 2012, 9:16AM) What you are really saying, then, is that you prefer to stay in 'your safety zone' by NOT having an "argument", which you would surely need in order to justify your 'opinion', but at the same time, you "argue" that what I have posted on this thread is just my 'opinion' that I can argue, and do, justify why I hold it. You have not even explored how far my evidence and proof extends What you are also arguing is that because I hold such an 'opinion', and can back it up with argument and evidence, that it is legitimate for you , who confesses an 'opinion only' but no argument to back it up, can just blithely roll out your 'opinion', which you choose not to justify with substantive argument and evidence, to include an unspecified group (you call "nats) that you say are "clinging to straws and making fools of themselves". How do you 'legitimately' make such a link, and leap of faith, except by outright prejudice? Does that just about sum up your crass hypocrisy and obviously closed-mind and, not least, a failure to fully understand the purpose of an open forum topic that you started in order to get to "The Truth" on Cornish Genocide? Do you remember the link on "Cognitive Dissonance" posted above? Read and learn! If you really believe the rubbish that you spout, you would surely feel OBLIGED to justify it. Would you not? That is having integrity. Every time that you post any text, it is typed within a window labeled "Join the Discussion".

  • Slimslad  |  April 20 2012, 6:19PM

    Phrases that might deter folk from a debate: "crass hypocrisy" "obviously closed-mind" "failure to fully understand" "rubbish that you spout".

  • KernowGB  |  April 20 2012, 8:37PM

    @Slimslad (re Friday, April 20 2012, 6:19PM) It has probably escaped your attention, with your 'selective reading', that it is a 'retrospective' assessessment on the very fact that any debate has already been consistently avoided. Furthermore, it is an observation in response to an individual that is attempting to defend the indefensible.

  • Slimslad  |  April 21 2012, 9:00AM

    Another two! "It has probably escaped your attention". 'selective reading'. As they say, "you are a right one to talk" about "selective reading" Your whole argument about "genocide" is based on the writings of one person, and (I suspect), you are the only person that actually believes in "Cornish Genocide". "A lone voice crying in the wilderness".

  • KernowGB  |  April 21 2012, 9:24AM

    @Slimslad (re Saturday, April 21 2012, 9:00AM) Which planet are you on? "Writings of one person". Let me change that expression to "Very Selective Reading". Since you obviously only have a very warped opinion on the realities of the world you live in and consider that I am a "lone voice crying in the wilderness", then the origin of this thread topic and the actions of the 'cosy-quartet' and the search for the truth has been for what purpose. You really just do have the attention span of a knat! But dream on! Stick to catching fish.

  • youngcornwall  |  April 21 2012, 9:28AM

    Don't forget "Naive" Slimslad, "Naive" is one that is used often, everyone who doesn't believe the nats Kings new suit fairy tales, according to them, are too "Naive".

  • Slimslad  |  April 21 2012, 9:55AM

    You are a "lone voice". Even Lemkin himself seems not to have noticed Cornwall. I can find no reference by Lemkin to Cornwall as a "victim of genocide", anywhere. Only you seem to write anything on this subject. i would be happy to be proved wrong.

  • KernowGB  |  April 21 2012, 11:24AM

    @YoungCornwall (re Saturday, April 21 2012, 9:28AM) Desperation creeping in now? Making up your own evidence still, to stay off-topic?! ------------------------------------------- @Slimslad (re Saturday, April 21 2012, 9:55AM) You clearly have no knowledge of what Lemkin has said, or to what his focus of research was. I do not have to prove you wrong, because you are totally ignorant of the topic under the microscope. Others will be the judge of your lack of input to the real debate. It has taken you until now to come to an observation (probably a guess) that was communicated in one of my posts above. However, just for argument: Does being a 'lone voice' make what I have been saying in my posts incorrect? None of the 'cosy-quartet' have even attempted to prove that to be the case. I know, for a fact, that you cannot do so! The evidence is overwhelming. Let me repeat an extract from one of my links given at Tuesday, March 27 2012, 8:26PM, namely: ------------------------------- Quote 1 - Cultural genocide ultimately was excluded from the final Convention, except for a limited prohibition on the forcible transfer of a group's children. The drafters acknowledged that the removal of children was physically and biologically destructive but further recognized that indoctrinating children into the customs,language, and values of a foreign group was "tantamount to the destruction of the [child's] group, whose future depended on that next generation." Despite the limited definition of the offense itself, broader cultural considerations do still play two important roles in prosecuting genocide under the Convention. First, acts of cultural genocide—conduct violating what the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) referred to as the "very foundation of the group"—tend to establish the genocidist's specific intent to destroy the protected group. ---------------------------------- As I said to YoungCornwall in a very recent post, which I repeat here for the benefit of the 'cosy-quartet' ------------------------------------ "Do you remember the link on "Cognitive Dissonance" posted above? Read and learn! If you really believe the rubbish that you spout, you would surely feel OBLIGED to justify it. Would you not? That is having integrity. Every time that you post any text, it is typed within a window labeled "Join the Discussion". ------------------------------------ Does the concept of a 'lone voice' also suggest that most of the 'cosy-quartet's diversionary comments have been mischievous, or worse? Does it also bring into question the dark motives for the origins of this thread? I could also point you to other incontrovertible factors that are included above plus a multitude of other indicators that I have not yet even touched upon. So, if you wish to debate the issues then stay on topic (or be ignored) and argue from an obvious point of knowledge and not unsubstantiated narrow 'opinion'.

  • Slimslad  |  April 21 2012, 2:46PM

    "I do not have to prove you wrong, because you are totally ignorant of the topic under the microscope. " I think that is game, set and match to me. Thank you for your time.

  • KernowGB  |  April 21 2012, 5:35PM

    @Slimslad (re Saturday, April 21 2012, 2:46PM) Since you have never stated which game you are playing, that is another meaningless comment to everyone but yourself. One thing is for sure is that it has had nothing to do with "Cornish Genocide and the Truth" STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW!

  • youngcornwall  |  April 21 2012, 6:14PM

    OK KernowGB, please tell us in what way shape or form, are the people of Cornwall being disadvantaged today, now at this moment in time, with this genocide that is supposed to be happening according to you. As far as I am concerned I will let you have the last word on this, so make it a good one, so that it is easy to understand please, remember, disadvantaged Cornish people today, because of this so called Cornish genocide.

  • KernowGB  |  April 21 2012, 8:40PM

    @YoungCornwall (re Saturday, April 21 2012, 6:14PM) How 'big' of you, and so arrogant! I would have thought your topic title would have been some sort of a clue and your choice of the term "disadvantaged" seems to me to a bit of a euphemism. We are, of course, not only talking about just "today". It also encompasses both the past, the present and the future. I will refer you back to my reply to a similar question that you asked previously, which you can read again at Tuesday, March 27 2012, 8:26PM. You have been playing games, from the moment of my first posting on the 26th March. Apart from the fact that I have already outlined the answers to your questions within my above posts, there is a lot of ground to cover before I respond to your attempt to reach the bottom line before you fully acknowledge the legitimacy of what has gone before. As far as I am concerned there has been no progress made at all by you, for me just to ignore almost a month of communication that you could have made good use of. However, it is all still there.

  • Slimslad  |  April 22 2012, 8:06AM

    Youngcornwall, you will only ever get evasion and arrogance from that bloke. Mind you, I did smile at the equivalent of "I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago" Typical political weasel-words. The fact that Lemkin studied cases of genocide all his life from all parts of the World and throughout history , yet never once mentions "Cornish genocide", blows the "theory" out of the water.

  • JoyKernow64  |  April 22 2012, 9:49AM

    But what is this to do with someone from Newcastle? "Bye" "Ta Ta"

  • KernowGB  |  April 22 2012, 10:09AM

    @SidelinerSad aka Slimslad (re Sunday, April 22 2012, 8:06AM) ---------------------- Quote: - "The fact that Lemkin studied cases of genocide all his life from all parts of the World and throughout history , yet never once mentions "Cornish genocide", blows the "theory" out of the water." ----------------------- As if you would know what you are talking about. You cannot even get what you are talking about correct. If what you say has any semblance of rational, or reasonable, thought, then it also disposes of all the International critique of the known limitations of the 1948 Convention (since 1948), including those acknowledged by the Convention framers themselves. Can everybody be wrong, just because of your extremely narrow prejudice and time-wasting trolling activities?

  • Slimslad  |  April 22 2012, 10:19AM

    The fact that Lemkin studied cases of genocide all his life from all parts of the World and throughout history , yet never once mentions "Cornish genocide", blows the "theory" out of the water."

  • KernowGB  |  April 22 2012, 12:15PM

    @Slimslad (re Sunday, April 22 2012, 10:19AM) Since you pretend to be so knowledgeable, but still misrepresent what Lemkin studied, let us test what you understand about what you have said. Your starter for 10: Just for the record, then, can you name the places that he does in fact mention. Then tell us what was the purpose of his researches and how he codified it. Then, please, tell us what relevance it has to whether, or not, he makes a specific reference to a particular place?

  • JoyKernow64  |  April 22 2012, 12:29PM

    He might have to go to the reference section of Newcastle library to research that but they aren't open on a Sunday. "bye" "Ta Ta"

  • Slimslad  |  April 22 2012, 12:33PM

    "Phrases that might deter folk from a debate: "crass hypocrisy" "obviously closed-mind" "failure to fully understand" "rubbish that you spout"." "As if you would know what you are talking about" "You cannot even get what you are talking about correct." The fact that Lemkin studied cases of genocide all his life from all parts of the World and throughout history , yet never once mentions "Cornish genocide", blows the "theory" out of the water.""

  • KernowGB  |  April 22 2012, 12:51PM

    @Slimslad (re Sunday, April 22 2012, 12:33PM) Just more 'avoidance' and 'trolling'. Nothing destroys debate like ignorance, trolling, or general disinterest. If people genuinely believe that they have something valid to say, then they will say it. If they are so convinced that what they say reflects your repetitive misinformation, contained within your post, then let them have the courage and integrity to substantiate it. As it stands, what you say cannot, as you are well aware, be substantiated and that is why you continue to avoid justifying it. "Cognitive Dissonance" STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW!

  • JoyKernow64  |  April 22 2012, 1:01PM

    Caught like a little fishy on a little dishy? Long goodbyes from Newcastle? "bye" "Ta Ta"

  • youngcornwall  |  April 22 2012, 1:03PM

    I know I said you could have the last word on this KernowGB, but your blatant sidestepping of a simple straightforward question is sickening, and to be honest it is bringing the whole Cornish respect down to its lowest level, even your nat cronies are keeping their heads down now, for fear of being made to look silly, you know the ones I mean, those who have been behind you, giving you the, "go on boy I'll hold your coat for you", and you have done just that, talk about a Cheap-Jack at the fair trying to sell rubbish, you take the cake. My post below, have another go at it, in the hope you may save a little face, not only for you but for the rest of us Cornish. by youngcornwall Saturday, April 21 2012, 6:14PM "OK KernowGB, please tell us in what way shape or form, are the people of Cornwall being disadvantaged today, now at this moment in time, with this genocide that is supposed to be happening according to you. As far as I am concerned I will let you have the last word on this, so make it a good one, so that it is easy to understand please, remember, disadvantaged Cornish people today, because of this so called Cornish genocide."

  • Slimslad  |  April 22 2012, 1:48PM

    "As it stands, what you say cannot, as you are well aware, be substantiated and that is why you continue to avoid justifying it." The man who coined the word, 'genocide',who studied acts of genocide,( throughout history and throughout the World), never mentioned "Cornish genocide", in any way, shape or form. Because Lemkin's work, (and Lemkin's work alone), has been used to justify the claim of "Cornish Genocide", then I think the lack of any writings on the subject by the man himself must call in to question any such claim.

  • KernowGB  |  April 22 2012, 2:13PM

    @YoungCornwall (re Sunday, April 22 2012, 1:03PM) As transparent as clear glass. You expect, but do not give! You then attempt to transpose the positions by pretending to be 'the victim' of something that you and your friends have been dong for the past 27 days to avoid engaging with what I have posted As I have said to another poster above: -------------------- "It is obvious to anyone that they have neither the intention, nor the ability, to properly engage in the discussion, because of the reasons in my posts above at Saturday, March 31 2012, 12:59PM and Saturday, March 31 2012, 1:00PM." -------------------- You cannot even address comments that I put into individual posts, but pass them by as if nothing has been said and then contrive an "I am the victim" post. I am more than prepared to stand by what I have said and be judged by others. You have made some particularly strong accusations in your post, but you are totally unable, or willing, to substantiate them. Like Slimslad, you make comments 'out of context' and then fabricate some presumed comment to go with it. I have no need of anyone to 'hold my coat', because I have the courage and conviction to promote, and discuss, what I know to be the truth. How about you, who has, so far, said a sum total of nothing that is relevant to this, YOUR, topic except whine and deny without substance? STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW!

  • KernowGB  |  April 22 2012, 4:53PM

    @Slimslad (re Sunday, April 22 2012, 1:48PM) Your response is still rubbish and I am compelled to ask, why you ignored my previous post, which I quote here, reformatted for clarity, so that you can see the only way that you can legitimately substantiate your still misrepresentative observation on Lemkin's work is to respond to a challenge on knowledge and comprehension: ----------------------------------------------------------------- by KernowGB - Sunday, April 22 2012, 12:15PM ........."@Slimslad (re Sunday, April 22 2012, 10:19AM) Since you pretend to be so knowledgeable, but still misrepresent what Lemkin studied, let us test what you understand about what you have said. Your starter for 10: Just for the record, then, can you: A - name the places that he does in fact mention. Then B - tell us what was the purpose of his researches and C - how he codified it. Then, D - please, tell us what relevance it has to whether, or not, he makes a specific reference to a particular place?" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Your actual post at Sunday, April 22 2012, 1:48PM seeks to avoid my request that you give some basic information to justify your position by just picking up on the statement in a subsequent post, namely, --------------------------------- ""As it stands, what you say cannot, as you are well aware, be substantiated and that is why you continue to avoid justifying it." --------------------------------- You then continue to misrepresent Lemkin by restaing your previous statement with an interesting, but irrelevant, use of brackets and change of word order, namely: ---------------------------------- The man who coined the word, 'genocide',who studied acts of genocide,( throughout history and throughout the World), never mentioned "Cornish genocide", in any way, shape or form. ---------------------------------- You then go on to explain, namely: ---------------------------------- Because Lemkin's work, (and Lemkin's work alone), has been used to justify the claim of "Cornish Genocide", then I think the lack of any writings on the subject by the man himself must call in to question any such claim." ---------------------------------- You have clearly avoided the key questions that I set you above, and which would have given an indication that you were correctly representing Lemkin's work, but you were aware that it would have presented you with an impossible dilemma in justifying the previous conclusion that you had contrived. Hence the avoidance Just to make the situation clear: Use of Lemkin's definition is the one and only basis for discussing genocide in its many guises. It is impossible not to use it, but as for it being "Lemkin's work alone" that I use to justify Cornish Genocide", that is the most evil misrepresentation yet, as even a cursory perusal of my posts above will show that not to be the case. You then go on to draw a most bizarre conclusion that you introduce with "then I think...." If you had understood anything at all about Lemkin's work, you would understand how bizarre your conclussion is. You have taken a desperate leap of faith and landed on Pluto!

  • Slimslad  |  April 22 2012, 6:07PM

    The use of the word "genocide" should always be used sparingly, lest the understanding of the word be diluted. This has nothing to do with Cornwall or Cornish.

  • Slimslad  |  April 22 2012, 6:10PM

    No more.

  • KernowGB  |  April 22 2012, 8:54PM

    Slimslad, Now you are seeking to move the goalposts, by changing tack and refusing to acknowledge the difference between "Genocide" the intention, and, 'How it (the intention)is achieved" the technique(s). The understanding of the word is already 'diluted', because of flawed official treatment of the crime in its broadest sense that has 'limited' its current understanding, by the public, to only that of 'physical genocide'. ---------------------------------------------------------- by Slimslad - Sunday, April 22 2012, 6:07PM "The use of the word "genocide" should always be used sparingly, lest the understanding of the word be diluted. This has nothing to do with Cornwall or Cornish." -------------------------------------------------------------- An interesting, and timely, website here, which picks up on the issue of genocide, which uses the euphemism "ethnic cleansing" - If the conversion works! http://tinyurl.com/6nuco5m However, whether Geno-, or Ethno-, is used, it still means the same thing.

  • JoyKernow64  |  April 23 2012, 8:05AM

    Wonder if "No more" means the same in Newcastle as it does in Cornwall?

  • KernowGB  |  April 23 2012, 11:26AM

    Only time will tell, but trolls will always be trolls. I am waiting to see if YoungCornwall comes back regarding the contents of the 'link' in my previous post, because it mentions one of the factors that I refused to confirm to him, pending his refusal to 'catch-up' on the above evidence and argument. Just one example of how the illusion of 'Cornwall being in England' (sic) is perpetuated. Although that site does go further.

  • KernowGB  |  April 23 2012, 8:41PM

    I just thought these lyrics might be appreciated within the context of this thread. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Kernow Crying................................(Anon) This is a story, (a) Story so shameful, (of a) Nation denied, (being) Covertly destroyed. (by) Royal collusion, (and) State Institutions, (an) Inertia exists now, (that is) Driven by us all. (We must) Recover our history, (Our) Culture, Our Constitution (So our ) Nation can continue, (and our) Children survive. (Having) Pride in their Antiquity, (and a) True Sense of Place, (with) Identity recognised, Confidence restored, Border secured. (as) Dr. Johnson (once) ironically declared (An) Independent State (for) the Cornish people, (of) Greater merit (than the) American's claim, (with our) Legitimacy and our Congress residing in Truro. (So) Fight for our Country (and) Fight for our Children, (a) Cornish education for confidence and the will, (to) Fight for our culture (and our) constitution restored (for) Control over our destiny, Integrity assured. (the) People are Sovereign (reject) arbitrary controls (let) One and All Unite, (So) Support the causes however you may, (and) We shall triumph over them all. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE NOW!

  • danwill74  |  May 19 2012, 1:50AM

    My partner has worked with a mental health worker from Rwanda whose family was killed in the Rwandan Genocide. I don't think you have a clue what you're talking about. I'm not even convinced you believe it yourself. Childish inflation of obscure points to upset people who disagree with your wealthy European privileged identity politics on an internet forum. Where are the bodies ? Where are the hundreds of thousands of people slain in a matter of days ? There are none. If you could point to them I assure you I'd be on your side 'stopping the cornish genocide now'. But there is no genocide, there's just odd ranting. We can put you in touch with our Rwandan friend if you like ? Maybe you could compare notes ?

  • KernowGB  |  May 22 2012, 12:47PM

    by danwill74 - Saturday, May 19 2012, 1:50AM "[...] ...there is no genocide, there's just odd ranting. [...]" ------------------------------------------------------------ I am intrigued as to why it is that after such a long time that you return to this thread with another 'rant', but failed to respond to my reply to your earlier posting at (by KernowGB - Monday, April 09 2012, 1:53PM "@ danwill74 - re Sunday, April 08 2012, 11:09PM) Nothing has changed and you still fail to understand the broad scope that, in reality, Genocide encompasses. You might consider it to be 'bizarre', because you had never even contemplated such a possibility, but I consider it to be one of the greatest evils that still exists in the modern world. Let me pose a thought for you to consider: Does genocide come 'out of the blue', or are there some indicators that precede it to make you aware that things might not be right with your particularl world. As I have said elsewhere the case for each group is unique and specific. What are the warning signs? Would you agree that prevention is better than cure? Now read Lemkin's definition above at (Tuesday, March 27 2012, 11:11AM). 'Responding' to the 'physical' is, and always will be, too little too late! Rather than just dismiss what I am saying, please look at the process in a more holistic way. Please believe me, when I say that I am very very serious about 'Cornish' Genocide, which in no way seeks comparison with 'physical' atrocities like that in Rwanda, or elsewhere.

  • KernowGB  |  May 22 2012, 10:22PM

    Mur ras, Gwynnhadu ! I usually make an assumption that there is no serious discussion from this forum but, as always, use it as an opportunity to make some small point or other, for the benefit of others. Enough has been said in above posts for anyone truly 'genuine' to engage in a serious discussion on the issues, but apart from no takers, even those originally pretending to 'have an interest' have backed away, because it is impossible for them to engage and appear sensible. It is a crucial, and very critical, issue for the 'Cornish' people and the future of the Cornish Nation.

  • ebxdlpk  |  May 22 2012, 11:55PM

    by ebxdlpkdTuesday, May 08 2012, 6:17PM "The "genocide" idea isn't mentioned by any political party in Cornwall, why is that?" KernowGB it would seem "ODD" after reading the long answers or points made on "thisiscornwall" and then this "engaging in a serious discussion on the issues" that we have no attempt to answer this simple question in some detail.

  • KernowGB  |  May 23 2012, 10:33AM

    by ebxdlpk - Tuesday, May 22 2012, 11:55PM "by ebxdlpkdTuesday, May 08 2012, 6:17PM "The "genocide" idea isn't mentioned by any political party in Cornwall, why is that?" KernowGB it would seem "ODD" after reading the long answers or points made on "thisiscornwall" and then this "engaging in a serious discussion on the issues" that we have no attempt to answer this simple question in some detail." ------------------------------------------------------------------- What is "ODD" is that you continue to ask me such a 'silly' question, when I have directly, or indirectly, given a response to it, at least twice, on "thisiscornwall". What is even more "ODD" is that you fail to say where your quoted posted is posted, but I would recommend that you check out any following posts from KernowGB on the 8th-9th May. Apart from the fact that it is certainly NOT "engaging" with the "issues", it is only asking me to give "an opinion" on 'other people', which, as I said, I have already done. The only way that you can get "a proper answer" to that is to ask those parties direct. When you have done that, then post both your question(s) posed to them and their replies here. Then we can move forward on it. However, that will be unlikely to change anything that I have already said on the matter, because however they react, that is entirely their own prerogative and choice. It will not alter the fundamental point of 'the EXISTENCE of Cornish Genocide', as explained above, unless, of course, they can offer a credible alternative explanation for the official lies and deception about our Cornish Duchy and the absence of a 'Cornish' school curriculum, plus a myriad of other examples of forced 'Cornish' assimilation into the 'majority national group'.

  • gwenonek  |  May 23 2012, 10:46AM

    The more I see of the post Olympic commercial binge in Cornwall, the more I am convinced that KernowGB is spot on.

  • ebxdlpk  |  May 23 2012, 11:25PM

    A "Cornish problem" explained in great detail and little of this as to why this "genocide idea isn't mentioned by any political party in Cornwall" or any human rights group etc strikes out as "ODD" (and diverting the subject on the use of a word won't make the question go away)?

  • ebxdlpk  |  May 24 2012, 8:47AM

    On second thoughts, forget that question and don't answer it, as the fear of hearing more of the oneway opposite views from either side of this subject is monotonous.

  • Chy_Howlek  |  May 24 2012, 9:04AM

    I am not as talented as KernowGB but I place pen to paper and write and write about my homeland of Cornwall to as many people as I can. I shout out the fact that 'This is Cornwall, not England and we are Cornish not English' at every available opportunity and despite the squeals on this forum, I shall always do so.

  • KernowGB  |  May 24 2012, 11:30AM

    by ebxdlpk - Wednesday, May 23 2012, 11:25PM "A "Cornish problem" explained in great detail and little of this as to why this "genocide idea isn't mentioned by any political party in Cornwall" or any human rights group etc strikes out as "ODD" (and diverting the subject on the use of a word won't make the question go away)?" -------------------------------------------------------- by ebxdlpk - Thursday, May 24 2012, 8:47AM "On second thoughts, forget that question and don't answer it, as the fear of hearing more of the oneway opposite views from either side of this subject is monotonous." --------------------------------------------------------- So, you reject my suggestion of the one and only way to resolve your question, which you have moved the goalposts on by now including 'human rights' groups. Did you anticipate what my only response could be and then decide to withdraw the question? I consider that I work within a "Cornish Rights" group and have been in communication with official bodies for well over twenty years. Much more than double that on other related issues. I see that as the right way to go, whilst also communicating the issues through various other media outlets. The intention is to inform opinions on Cornish affairs, because I firmly believe in the Chavez quote above. However, the only way for you to get the specific answers that you want (but now do not?) is for you to do some 'leg-work' of your own, because I am certainly not going to second-guess the interests and actions, or motives, of others, especially when the consequences potentionally point to a constitutional crisis. I will willingly discuss Cornish Genocide with anybody having a 'sensible' understanding of what Genocide is and how it may be achieved and how it has been, and is being, applied to the Cornish, as opposed to just expressing obvious symptoms of Cognitive Dissonance. Much of which has already been said above, and elsewhere, together with the background, but with no forthcoming debate. Pointing the finger is "easy", but I am only interested in "Recognition" of the Cornish People and the Cornish Nation and an 'official' acknowledgement of the wrongs that have been, and are being, inflicted upon us as a people.

  • ebxdlpk  |  May 25 2012, 11:11PM

    "So, you reject my suggestion of the one and only way to resolve your question, which you have moved the goalposts on by now including 'human rights' groups. Did you anticipate what my only response could be and then decide to withdraw the question?" "one and only way" After many years of attempting to change the route of this "Cornish genocide" the whole issue of why no political groups and/or/as well human rights groups have NOT taken up this problem isn't known? or isn't up for discussion by the very people fighting for Cornish recognition,"ODD" An unsuccessful campaign with little acknowledgment! There must be a known reason for this as there would have been many exchanges and rejections, why not open up? or is this some of that "cognitive dissonance" happening! Lets hear the history of the real "Cornish genocide" idea the struggle to be taken seriously by the world!

  • KernowGB  |  May 26 2012, 3:35PM

    @ebxdlpk (re Friday, May 25 2012, 11:11PM) You are just wasting yours and everyone else's time with your jibes at my response, or lack of it, to your question. The answer to which is of no interest to me. What will happen, will happen, when the time is right. The fact that you are so 'concerned' about it is that you obviously have some feeling that it 'is happening'. A feeling that I share with you and a few others on these boards, because of their obvious concerns that they try to 'play the fact down'. The resolution to your conundrum is, as I have said on many occasions, entirely in your own hands. Therefore, please get on with it and report back, then you might be able to relax.... or not! I am not quite sure how you would know, whichever way, because it obviously 'colours' people's thoughts - hence all these threads.

  • ebxdlpk  |  May 27 2012, 12:18PM

    "The answer to which is of no interest to me" The above quote is a weak and unhelpful reply to a simple question. The rest of the post shows an attempt at attacking an individual, it is the case as these posters said early on in this thread. by Taxman100Sunday, March 18 2012, 4:17PM "I have come to the conclusion those of the Cornish Nationalist persuasion simply argue, or attempt to denigrate others rather than debate any given subject.... - nobody with any intelligence and the ability to research at the highest level would ever succumb to their scribblings!" by SlimsladSunday, March 11 2012, 9:38AM "Not the "ethnic-cleansing" that some would have us believe."

  • KernowGB  |  May 27 2012, 3:29PM

    @ebxdlpk (re Sunday, May 27 2012, 12:18PM) Why does that reply not surprise anyone? You consider my response to be weak, but it puts you 'in charge' of your own solution, as it should be. Any response that I have given, and could give, will be just used as an excuse by you to say something else derogatory. You have the power to resolve the whole aspect of your conundrum by doing quite a simple task of going direct to the organisations, of your choice, and asking your very simple question. All very simple really. Here is another simple question: Why do you choose not to do so? Please explain. Subsequent to those items that you have quoted (my first post was on the 25th March), a lot of information has been posted to this, and other. threads, but with no response in the way of any meaningful discussion. I especially like the middle one of the three that you quote - where is the proof and results to show that that is anything more than an example of the first quote? It also begs the question: what is there to worry about and tie-up so much of cyber-space - if true?

  • ebxdlpk  |  May 28 2012, 7:20PM

    "All very simple really. Here is another simple question: Why do you choose not to do so? Please explain." The debate isn't on then? Have a nice day.

  • KernowGB  |  May 28 2012, 8:17PM

    You all decided that back on your national Saints day. Since then you have oll only ever been attempting to entice me to dance to your tune. You have a long period of research yet to do (namely, read all above) and come back with some semblance of a sensible debate. Your avoidance in doing anything at all, to help yourselves, is duly noted.

  • KernowGB  |  May 29 2012, 9:45AM

    Type 5 Technique of Denial through Cognitive Dissonance: 5. The "Lizard" technique is a method of ignoring the evidence presented against a false belief, and instead bringing in other peripheral and distracting pieces of information that might seem to support the false belief. Here the subject tries to build up a logical but tangential edifice for supporting his or her false belief, skirting around the main logical objections to the belief itself, and employing a diversionary tactic. There is no direct engagement on the fundamental issue, only clever side-stepping. [The Lizard drops its still-wiggling tail to divert attention elsewhere while it escapes.]

  • KernowGB  |  May 29 2012, 1:59PM

    Whilst certain 'interested' individuals, in search of the truth (oh, really?), consistently deny and avoid a discussion on Cornish Genocide, it was intriguing to note on an unrelated thread that, in response to a request for a couple of individuals to answer questions relating to false allegations that they had made about certain people, that one of them replied saying: -------------------------------------------------------------- "by Slimslad - Monday, May 28 2012, 9:10PM "Then, like the answers to what exactly is Cornish Genocide? You won't get them." -------------------------------------------------------------- Please note the same tactic, as explained in the previous post, being applied in reverse, because the answers to the stated question is repeatedly given within this thread, but there has been no engagement except denial, divertion and denigration. I shall give the short and simple answer here on this proper thread, that has been 'avoided' for the past month, so that the above individual and his associate may now respond to the question that they have been asked to respond to, without making pathetic excuses. The short answer to the above question, "what exactly is Cornish Genocide?" is: "The forced assimilation of the 'Cornish people' into the 'English majority' with the knowledge of its consequential destruction of the Cornish national minority, by an official process of lies, deception and propaganda." Cornwall is NOT in England nor OF England and the Cornish people are not English! The Cornish Nation and its Territory (the Country) are entirely separate and distinct from England (the Country). Now read all the above! Your turn Slimslad & tylertoby! - on the correct thread, please.

  • ebxdlpk  |  May 30 2012, 5:13PM

    I have shown already how some claim to want to debate and then run at the first sign of a real question/debate. And I now will single the offense of inciting hatred. by KernowGBMonday, May 28 2012, 8:17PM "You all decided that back on your national Saints day." Settling an issue to cause disagreement or hostility between people is the motive behind this posting and why it is politically dangerous for any party to take on. We should all join in encouraging a rejection of this type of thinking, with its soul purpose of provoking unrest. This is the last posting on this subject from me.

  • crowsanwra  |  May 30 2012, 5:24PM

    Thank heavens for that. I for one could make neither head nor tail of 'ebxdlpk'!

  • KernowGB  |  May 30 2012, 5:49PM

    by ebxdlpk - Wednesday, May 30 2012, 5:13PM "I have shown already how some claim to want to debate and then run at the first sign of a real question/debate. And I now will single the offense of inciting hatred. -------------------------------------------------------- You have shown no such thing! Please give some examples of where anything of what you say in the above quote is true? You are also honour-bound now to explain the rest of your rather obscure post. This thread is, allegedly, about finding out the Truth on Cornish Genocide. Please indicate to me, and others, where there has been any attempt to even engage in the topic of this thread, by you, its originator, or any others of the we-are-in-denial fraternity? Being an obvious part of that fraternity, you seek and use every excuse and trick in the book to make yourselves look like some form of Angelic host, but, in truth, you are a bunch of closed-minded charlatans. I came onto this forum specifically to discuss this topic, so why would I run away from debating it? It was your fraternity that faded into the mist!

  • Gurnards_Head  |  May 30 2012, 7:18PM

    THIS IS A TROLLS CHARTER. Never visit the sins of the Fathers on their children... there is no place for hatred... what happened in the past regrettable as it is... it is now time to move on in a spirit of reconciliation... heads held high... they have done it in Eire... its time for us Cornish to do likewise secure in the knowlege that harsh lessons have been learned from history that will strengthen us all to face the future...look back but do not stare. KERNOW BYS VYKEN.

  • KernowGB  |  May 30 2012, 11:02PM

    @Gurnards_Head (re Wednesday, May 30 2012, 7:18PM) There is no intention, by me, at least, "to visit the'sins of the fathers on theuir children" and neither do I 'hate' anyone. I am only concerned with spelling out what is happening to Cornwall now and during the last century. It all stems from long ago, but that information is only necessary to put the whole sorry shebang into some form of context. The information above, which can be added to, does not blame individuals, because we have all been deceived by the lies, deception and propaganda promulgated by the Heads of State, (The Lady and Her Lady - as with their predecessors) but an unwillingness to view the situation with an open mind, by individuals, shows a willingness to perpetuate the evil rather than question it and share some common ground in the search for truth and reconciliation. I lump those that fall within a broad definition of culpability as the English Imperial State (EIS), because the suppression of Cornish Rights is an ongoing legacy of English Imperialism. I argue from an evidence and fact-based position, which is entirely neutral, but which identifies and explains the failures of the status quo to protect 'Cornish' interests and Rights and which, by their very existence may be legitimately categorised as processes of Genocide. It is the only way, as I see it, to bring pressure on the Government to respect Cornish Rights. Whilst I agree with and accept the need for a Devolved Assembly, Kernow is much more than that. It is a distinct constitutional territorial entity in its own right, existing outside of the Crown but, supposedly protected by it. Kernow is different from Eire, in that we have been denied formal access to our history, so there is a lot of awareness-creation that still needs to be done. I suspect that we are both of a similar age and had the benefit of those around us that 'passed on' information of our heritage. From your comment on another thread, I was a bit further up the coast (past Newquay) and did not have the benefit of a teacher, but having left school, I was in the right place to be educated proper by the people around me and learnt well how 'Cornish' my Mother was, when I read a wonderful book by Claude Berry. Gwyr Erbyn an Bys!

  • poldice  |  May 30 2012, 11:53PM

    I am not disputing what you say, both my great Grandmothers were Irish and one was born at the tail end of the famine in Skibbereen so a part of my family has really experienced the madness that has shaped modern Eire. There has been real bitterness and hatred there in the relatively recent past but the modern Irish people with the exception of a tiny few have had the courage to move on because what they have now is infinitely better than what is past. Of course Eire is different to Kernow which has not in recent history experienced a revolution followed by a tragic civil war, their wounds are deeper and more raw. Funnily enough my old teacher at primary school taught us our own history, what a privelige it was to be a native Perraner, the Jesuits were right, get the child at seven and you have the adult for life such was the impression he made on many of us. Wrongs need not be forgotten as they teach us much including the art of reconciliation, as I have said repeatedly, look back but dont stare, the best way to beat those who do not accept what we are is to eclipse them and sideline them by being a better example than them, effectively admonish with friendship. I am not an academic but I am sufficiently comfortable in my own Cornish skin to ignore the insidious and plough my own furrow in the way I see fit whatever the English care to do, Ghandi had it right with his passive resistance, protest by turning your back on what offends, sit down if necessary but mainly just get on with life in a peaceful productive manner. This frustrates those that expect you to be hateful and beligerent and they end up confused by behaviour that does not conform with the stereotype fixed in their closed minds. I am sure that when fate decrees the Cornish assembly so many desire will evolve, hopefully in my lifetime as I was proud to be one of the fifty original signatories demanding an assembly. Best wishes and good cheer to 'ee my Boy.

  • KernowGB  |  May 31 2012, 11:41AM

    by poldice - Wednesday, May 30 2012, 11:53PM "Funnily enough my old teacher at primary school taught us our own history, what a privelige it was to be a native Perraner, the Jesuits were right, get the child at seven and you have the adult for life such was the impression he made on many of us." ------------------------------------------------------------ Poldice, I agree with everything that you say and I hope that I always operate within 'proper' guidelines (with proper people). I have no doubt that every 'Cornish' person is happy with the knowledge that they are truly 'Cornish'. I know of many good 'Cornish' people' (much better than I am!) that have simply 'given up' and their Cornishness will be just taken, by them, to the grave. That is a direct affect of the process of Genocide, as are mixed messages of what it means to be Cornish - stated (by others) within these msg boards. What concerns me is that whilst being in that happy state, what do they do about actually passing on what it is they are proud of and why they are proud? If they do not replace the abysmal lack of formal teaching of our Cornish Heritage and history etc., (a key aspect of the process of genocide!) then what value is there in it? I would confess to being verbally aggressive and if something needs to be said, then I will say it, without fear or favour - even if the pseudo-sensitive recipient - invariably a troll! - chooses to misrepresent it as being 'insulting' or 'rude'. Furthermore, I will only ever say things that I can, and will, substantiate. Apart from that I am completely non-aggressive... and friendly! My much preferred pastime is Cornish Traditional Music & Dance, which suggests a very strong link with Peranporth over the past 30 years. Lowena dhys

  • Lazer_Scapel  |  May 31 2012, 12:02PM

    Having read many of the comments here, I do wonder what has happened, or is happening, within the County of Cornwall. At first glance it appears to have been taken over by those with extremists views. Then you realise it is not what you hear on a day-to-day basis, and further realise those who make the extreme comments are those who belong to an insignificant minority. Empty cans make the loudest noise springs to mind.

  • KernowGB  |  May 31 2012, 12:35PM

    Déjà vu - who are you?

  • KernowGB  |  May 31 2012, 5:17PM

    Time to get back on-Topic. ------------------------------------------------------- "It's not that Cornwall became part of England, it's just that the English forgot Cornwall was not part of their country." -------------------------------------------------------- Here is a link especially for the serial-deniers, and also anyone that would like to understand something about the Cornish Socio-political scene over the past, say, 100 years. "Dr Rob's PhD Thesis online" "A Passion to Exist: Cultural Entrepreneurship and the search for authenticity in Cornwall " http://tinyurl.com/6uqo9g7 Enjoy!

  • KernowGB  |  May 31 2012, 8:38PM

    Why is there so much confusion over what is meant by "England"? Who is aware of when they should correctly use one or the other, or to differentiate, from meaning Britain? · England (the country) - That part of Britain that does not include Cornwall, Wales or Scotland. · England (the country) – the territory of nation or State. · England (the country) – Hegemonically contrived synonym for Britain. · England (the kingdom) – A political unit ruled by a sovereign · England (the Empire) – extending political Hegemony over other nations Taking the most simplistic meaning and putting it another way: England (the country) is the territory where the English people live. England (the kingdom) is the territory ruled over by the Sovereign and can consist of more than the one country, for example, England plus Cornwall (where the Cornish people live) and Wales (where the Welsh people live). The Duchy of Cornwall, and its civil Government, is not in England (the country) and no amount of Imperial propaganda will change that truth. To Deny, and misrepresent, Cornish Constitutional Rights is Genocide!

  • KernowGB  |  June 01 2012, 9:13PM

    Extracts from Preliminary Statement on behalf of the Duke of Cornwall Duchy of Cornwall, Somerset House, May, 1855. -------------------------------------------------- Extract A: It does not appear from the case stated on behalf of the Crown, that any act of ownership on the part of the Crown has ever been exercised over the property now forming the subject of consideration, or that any other title is asserted than the primá facie common law prerogative right of the Crown in general, to property of this description, and which is now asserted, for the first time, in opposition to the Duchy, after the lapse of many hundred years. It is contended, on the part of the Duchy, that this general primá facie right of the Crown has not application, as against the Duke of Cornwall, within his Duchy or County of Cornwall, and, consequently, not to the particular property forming the subject of the present question; inasmuch as, that in very ancient times, - long before legal memory - probably from the time when the Britons were driven by the Saxon invasion to the extremities of the kingdom in the West, Cornwall appears to have been, like Wales, a distinct principality. ============================================= Extract B: The inhabitants of the islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, and Sark, were by the King exempted from the payment of what was called the alien's custom within the realm of England ; but by the express command of the Duke and his council, this custom was exacted from them within the precincts of the Duchy. See Acts of the Council of the Black Prince in October, 31st Edward III. (Extract below) These latter, it is submitted, were fiscal regulations, inconsistent with any other supposition than that the Duke was quasi Sovereign within his Duchy. ============================================ Appendix N to Case on behalf of Duke of Cornwall (February 1857) Extract FROM THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL OF EDWARD THE BLACK PRINCE AT THE CHAPTER HOUSE. ------------------------------------------- 7 - 31 Edw. III [People of Guernsey, &c. to be charged in the Duchy with the custom duty notwithstanding to King's order to the contrary] Edward, &c., to our dear servant Thomas the son of Henry our Havener of Cornwall, greeting. Forasmuch as you have written to some of our council to be informed what you shall do concerning some things touching your bailliwick, we make known to you, that forasmuch as a writ is come to you on the part of our very dear Lord and Father the King, to permit the people of the Isles of Guernsey, Sark, and Alderney to pass with their goods and merchandize, quit of the custom of three-pence in the pound for five years, we will that you take to our use this custom, and all others of these people, and of others in manner as you have taken them previously to this time, until we instruct you otherwise, and that you warn our Council at London, in case a writ should come to you, "sicut alias," upon this business. And as you wish to be informed what you shall do as regards the prisage of wines which are to come, and shall be sold within your bailliwick at this time, we will and command you that you cause them to be sold at the best price which you shall be able, and shall be for our profit. And also as to what you shall do concerning the cocket of wool and leather in Cornwall, we will and command you that you act in this matter, as you did in the year last past, and in the year preceding. --------------------------------------------------------- The above items are extracted from the Duchy evidence submitted to defend the Duchy's Right to the ownership of the Cornish Foreshore.

  • KernowGB  |  June 02 2012, 3:37PM

    Another relevant article, having an association with Cornish Genocide may be found on 'Hot off the Press' of the "Save Cornwall" Internet Newspaper website. It is just another aspect of the British Democratic Deficit that has particularly sinister consequences for the Cornish people. The full article may be found here: http://tinyurl.com/d492qtr ------------------------------------- Extract from - EXEMPTIONS FROM DEMOCRACY Lord Berkeley, in a speech in the House of Lords on 15th May 2012, quoting a representative of the Duchy of Cornwall, stated that:- "the Duchy is not democratically accountable in any meaningful sense". Lord Berkeley's speech covered the Duke of Cornwall's right to bona vacantia; escheat; ownerless property; foreshore; gold and silver mined or treasure and crown immunity in Cornwall and posed the question; why is this different in Cornwall? Suggestions for modernisation were made for the Heir to the Throne's Duchy of Cornwall, and, "Most important, the Duchy should not have Crown immunity". Who is responsible? Is the avoidance of democratic accountability a criminal offence? Why have generations of politicians condoned and ignored instances of the failure of democratic accountability? Politicians have also failed to produce a one-stop British constitution document containing details of the enforceable responsibilities for persons elected or employed to exercise power in a manner we were taught to believe would mean democratic accountability. The Duchy of Cornwall has never been democratically accountable to the pre-England indigenous British and Celtic Cornish people of Cornwall. [...] There has been no public debate on the relationship between the English national majority and Cornish national minority rights caught in a Duchy time warp. [...] -----------------------------------------------------------

  • KernowGB  |  June 03 2012, 7:40PM

    It is good to see the Cornish National flag of St Piran on the Royal Barge, "Gloriana". Perhaps that is a start of the Truth and Reconcilliation? http://tinyurl.com/7cp4xcz

  • Gurnards_Head  |  June 03 2012, 10:30PM

    "What an absolutely glorious day for the Queen and all Cornish People proving Cornwall really is the Westernmost Country in the British Family of Nations,reinforced by the fact that no English Shire Counties were represented in similar fashion. This truly is an historic day for us as Cornish people, as in Eire last year the British Queen in her wisdom is building the bridges necessary to heal past hurts and mistakes in order to invoke a new spirit of goodwill, optimism and unity between the Nations of the British Isles.""

  • KernowGB  |  June 03 2012, 11:03PM

    @Gurnards_Head (re Sunday, June 03 2012, 10:30PM) I could not agree more and hope that it may be a new beginning, but we will have to wait and see what develops after the festivities are all over. I certainly hope that this will give some new impetus to the Government in now recognising 'the Cornish National Minority within the scope of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM), which is where all the rest of our outstanding grievances should meet with some degree of resolution in building a Cornish future.

  • Gurnards_Head  |  June 03 2012, 11:31PM

    This is merely the end of the beginning of a long march started really started for me in the heady days of Cornish Solidarity which was eventually wrecked by a couple of overinflated ego's despite which it actually achieved most of its aims demonstrating what people of goodwill could achieve by their united endeavours. But the saga of Cornish Solidarity also clearly demostrated how few it takes to sow discord, I fear the real danger lies with the Politicians some of whom will already be horrified by the import of what has taken place under their radar on this historic day for Cornwall. One thing is certain sure given the virtual obsession with precedence and the sinificance of flags in Royal circles the flag of St Piran did not appear by chance or accident today, that makes what has occured even more historic and significant, personally I am still astounded by it. Lets sleep on it and see what the cold grey light of dawn holds forth, I am positive because there is now impetous where before there was merely inertia (by Royal appointment so to speak). ONEN HAG HAL & DEEP RESPECTS TO QUEEN ELIZABETH THE SECOND ON THE OCCASION OF HER JUBILEE.

  • KernowGB  |  June 04 2012, 2:30PM

    The thought of sleep last night was, I am afraid, wishful thinking for this individual. I am wondering whether it was an apolitical gesture from a person that is not supposed to be 'political', in the same way that the Royal Commission on the Constitution '72/73 made its "use of the Duchy on all appropriate occasions" recommendation? It was after all said and done, 'only a declariation of her true constitutional position'. As you say, the biggest hurdle will be the politicians and, of course, the Government, but, at least, we have 'another stick' with which to beat them , metaphorically speaking, of course.

  • KernowGB  |  June 04 2012, 9:39PM

    Also interesting is the flag sequence: The first pair were Scotland (P) & England (S) 2nd pair 2 x Motability ? 3rd Pair Cornwall (P) & London (S)(?) 4th Pair Wales (P) & N. Ireland (S)

  • Taxman100  |  June 17 2012, 11:24AM

    If one disagrees with the comments made by the Nationalists on this site then one is called a 'denier'. What do I call a Nationalist who disagrees with my views? We can, if we wish, all cherry pick the sections of history which suit our politics. However, the sensible and intelligent person reads all and then comes to a conclusion. A Thesis is exactly that, a Thesis. It doesn't necessarily make it fact, it is theoretical (may have been, may not have been, probably wasn't). I have read many thesis written by eminent Historians, and have written one myself - that does not mean I or the other authors are correct either. The truth, which Nationalists can never accept is that Ancient History is by its very nature highly speculative; which gives the author great scope to 'manipulate' the facts to suit his/her own fanciful ideas. The Battle of Hehil is a good example. When fully assembled the supporting evidence indicates that in all probability the battle never took place - but that didn't stop people from writing pleasant little Thesis about it which suited their political stance! There is more evidence the Cornovii did not exist in isolation than there is in support of the claims made concerning the Battle of Hehil. I think this thread has run its course. If it isn't retired soon then someone will class it as Ancient Cornish history and contemplate writing a thesis about it!

  • KernowGB  |  June 18 2012, 7:51PM

    @Taxman100 (re Sunday, June 17 2012, 11:24AM) Nice try! Especially the obscure reference to the Battle of Hekil). Cherry-picking at its best. But this thread is NOT about ancient history, it is about the here and now as you will quickly find out if you, and anyone else, systematically reads through it. Any reference, or evidence, that probes back into history is purely to provide background information to show how and why the current constitutional status wilfully misrepresents the truth about the existence of the Cornish people and imposes a completely unsatisfactory form of Government upon the Duchy of Cornwall, whose Duke has turned his back on both the Duchy and the Cornish people. This thread exposes a wrong that until it is properly resolved by honesty and integrity will always be a wrong enacted against the people of the Cornish Nation. Those currently culpable for 'perpetuating' this wrong, even if not initiating it, have just missed a golden opportunity to open up a dialogue of Truth and Reconcilliation - but it is not too late and the issue is not going to go away!! People reading this thread, will no doubt soon become aware that at no time has there been a genuine engagement with the topic by those, like Taxman100, who now seek to get it closed. There is still a lot more that can, and should, be said.

  • gwenonek  |  June 19 2012, 11:34AM

    Now it has been proven that the Cornish are amongst the original Britons along with their very close relatives the Welsh, both of which predate the English and the political creation of England by thousands of years, then even more credibility is given to KernowGB's overwhelming evidence of Cornish genocide down the years.

  • KernowGB  |  June 23 2012, 6:45PM

    @gwenonek (re Tuesday, June 19 2012, 11:34AM) Many thanks for the vote of confidence, Gwenonek. The evidence is, indeed, overwhelming as is also the key indicators of culpability and, crucially, "intent". Most people fail to understand what is meant by genocide, because of the narrow limitations used within the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide. This link: http://tinyurl.com/bm9qvlz contains some very useful 'current' information (and International thinking) on this narrow limitation and, whilst the whole article is immensly important, the last three paragraphs are of particular significance to a proper understanding of the flawed nature of the '48 Convention. It should be read in conjunction with Lemkin's definition, which I also include here, for clarity, as a reformatted version of Lemkin's Definition of Genocide. I have split into sections with my use of section-headings for clarity. The original may be viewed, within context, at: http://tinyurl.com/7zpx6eo ----------------------------------------------------------- Lemkin's Definition of Genocide General Description: Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. Objectives: The objectives of such a plan would be disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups. Operation: Genocide is directed against the national group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in their individual capacity, but as members of the national group. Phases: Genocide has two phases: one, destruction of the national pattern of the oppressed group; the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor. This imposition, in turn, may be made upon the oppressed population which is allowed to remain or upon the territory alone, after removal of the population and the colonization by the oppressor's own nationals." Techniques: · Political · Social · Cultural · Economic · Biological · Physical: ······ Endangering Health ······ Mass Killing · Religious · Moral -------------------------------------------------------- The bit that people generally fail to understand is, as explained in the Carnegie Article (see first link), namely: ------------------------ "Collective identity is not self-evident but derives from the numerous, inter-dependent aspects of a group's existence. Lemkin's original conception of genocide expressly recognized that a group could be destroyed by attacking any of these unique aspects. By limiting genocide to its physical and biological manifestations, a group can be kept physically and biologically intact even as its collective identity suffers in a fundamental and irremediable manner. Put another way, the present understanding of genocide preserves the body of the group but allows its very soul to be destroyed. " ---------------------------------------------------------- Now reflect upon this not complete list: · Cornish Duchy versus English county · Cornish Education versus English Education · Cornish Symbolism versus English Symbolism · Cornish Territory versus English Territory · Cornish A/V News-media versus English A/V News-media

  • KernowGB  |  June 23 2012, 10:26PM

    Whilst in the mood, a few more to add to the list in my previous post: · Cornish Language versus English Language · Cornish History versus English History · Cornish Geography versus English Geography · Cornish Placenames versus English Placenames · Cornish Identity versus English Identity · Cornish People versus English People · Cornish Heritage versus English Heritage · Cornish Nature versus English Nature · Cornish Industrial Estates versus English Industrial Estates · Cornish Partnerships versus English Partnerships

  • KernowGB  |  September 20 2012, 2:34PM

    Time for a bit more reading material for the 'flawed-truth-seekers' suffering from Cognitive Dissonance. A further discussion on the flaws and limitations of the 1948 Convention on Genocide that is neither initiated nor inspired by this "one person", which should be read in conjunction with a re-read of all the above. http://tinyurl.com/8mwn5bw

  • Slimslad  |  September 20 2012, 4:11PM

    Lemkin on Cornish Genocide? Alexander K.A. Greenawalt on Cornish Genocide?

  • Frank_Scully  |  September 20 2012, 5:36PM

    Poetry and genocide in one post! How delightful. Surely super-sophisticated political operators like yourself would recognise the inappropriateness of that? But I really, really detest you anonymous foil-hat wearing cowards making these totally false claims of "Cornish genocide". Show your evidence. You insult the dead victims of Nazi Germany, Armenia, Rwanda and Cambodia. No genocide ever happened in Cornwall. Stop making these baseless claims.

  • Rialobran  |  September 20 2012, 9:25PM

    Surely super-sophisticated political operators like yourself would recognise the inappropriateness of that? .....Like apologising for a lie? Nick Clegg for example..... As for being a ' foil-hat wearing cowards' name the time and place...

  • Slimslad  |  September 21 2012, 8:43AM

    "As for being a ' foil-hat wearing cowards' name the time and place..." These particular folk should be easy to spot, Frank. They will be wearing balaclavas.

  • KernowGB  |  September 21 2012, 10:38AM

    Frank_Scully said (re Thursday, September 20 2012, 5:36PM) Show your evidence. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Read, but more importantly, understand what is being said in the above postings. ================ Frank_Scully said (re Thursday, September 20 2012, 5:36PM) You insult the dead victims of Nazi Germany, Armenia, Rwanda and Cambodia. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Where and when have I ever done that? ================ Frank_Scully said (re Thursday, September 20 2012, 5:36PM) Stop making these baseless claims. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- As before, read all the above. On what basis do you make such claims yourself, namely, where is YOUR evidence?

  • Slimslad  |  September 25 2012, 3:27PM

    You insult the dead victims of Nazi Germany, Armenia, Rwanda and Cambodia. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Where and when have I ever done that? By using an emotive name for something you invented.

  • KernowGB  |  September 25 2012, 4:13PM

    @Slimslad (re Tuesday, September 25 2012, 3:27PM) If that is what you 'perveive' to be a factual explanation, then why not have the courage to resort to evidence-based argument to substantiate and prove that your point is not just more empty rhetoric and CD denial. You have all had long enough to aquaint yourselves with the finer details of such a topic. Has there been any progress? I have (above and elsewhere) identified the perpetrators, the target group, purpose and intent, and the processes being used so your task is simple: You need to be able to explain a) - the validity of your comment b) - where am I incorrect (and why?) on any of it, and c) - an alternative explanation of the "Cornish Paradox".

  • Slimslad  |  September 25 2012, 5:35PM

    There is no academic evidence of "Cornish Genocide". There is an amateur "historian" who has found one source that "fits" his own personal opinion. Unfortunately, that "source", (who coined the word genocide), never mentioned Cornish "genocide"

  • KernowGB  |  September 25 2012, 6:29PM

    @Slimslad (re Tuesday, September 25 2012, 5:35PM) 1 - Not true! It is given, ad nauseum, in the above postings from KernowGB. Let us assume for one moment that what you say, however inconceivable, might be true, then what would you consider to be categorised as "academic evidence"? 2 - Not true! If the facts fit the rules then personal professional status is irrelevant not that you have any knowledge of the truth of what you can only assert. It ceases to be my "personal opinion", because the argument is evidence-based, which you are free to 'prove' (with evidence) to be incorrect. Furthermore, your own obsession with "one source" is flawed as a read of the above will confirm, because it is a subject that has been the focus of considerable debate internationally and there are numerous links in my postings above to prove that fact. The links also give many examples of where steps have been taken to overcome the limitations and shortcomings of the 1948 Convention on Genocide, which latter, if you recall, is your "single source" reference driving your flawed perception and opinions. Perhaps you would be kind enough to advise us of your amateur/professional qualification in this matter? 3 - Totally irrelevant! You have consistently, and typically, failed, to prove the relevance of that unsubstantiated assertion, or list the places that Lemkin does mention, as earlier requested by KernowGB. Perhaps you might now consider properly responding to the points a), b) & c) within my previous posting?

  • Slimslad  |  September 25 2012, 8:39PM

    Let us just assume , that Lemkin is "academic evidence", given how much credence you give him regarding genocide.

  • Slimslad  |  September 25 2012, 8:44PM

    Google "genocide". http://tinyurl.com/c8h3fom Then Google "Cornish genocide" http://tinyurl.com/buv2cwf Just see how personal your theory is.

  • KernowGB  |  September 26 2012, 11:21AM

    by Slimslad - Tuesday, September 25 2012, 8:39PM "Let us just assume , that Lemkin is "academic evidence", given how much credence you give him regarding genocide." ------------------------------------------------------------------- Get off the fence. Is it or is it not "academic evidence"? In your posting at (Tuesday, March 27 2012, 2:26PM) you referred to "Lemkin's IDEA". If what you are saying in your post is truly what you believe, categorically, then you have definitely shot yourself in the foot. Are you also now indirectly saying [we can assume] that all the material I have submitted (above) to support my argument is also "academic evidence" because I GIVE IT SO MUCH CREDENCE? Or, is it simply "academic evidence" because that is what, in fact, it is! ======================== @Slimslad (re Tuesday, September 25 2012, 8:44PM) Why is any of that relevant? Every hypothesis starts somewhere (by someone) and the subsequent discussion is about proving it (or otherwise) by argument and evidence. I have made the case above for the existence of Cornish Genocide, and who is culpable, and supported this with evidence, which by any form of 'personal' definition is, indeed, "academic evidence". Therefore, your only valid course of action is to counter what I have said by submitting your own argument, supported by "academic evidence", to show why what I have said is incorrect. Posting at 'Opinion' is not evidence and neither can it be construed as offering anything resembling an argument. Nevertheless, thanks for the links. Some interesting stuff on the second one, if you take the time to browse. My posting at (Tuesday, September 25 2012, 4:13PM) still applies.

  • KernowGB  |  September 26 2012, 11:42AM

    Something that we should all bear in mind: It is a clear and indisputable fact that the principal methodology of genocide in Cornwall is via the medium of an English 'ciuile education' whether this be within the formal educational system or the many facets of the opinion-creation media. French historian, Marc Ferro, encapsulates what it is all about in the preface to his book "The Use and Abuse of History – or How the past is taught" (1981). He writes: "Our image of other peoples, or of ourselves for that matter, reflects the history we are taught as children. This history marks us for life. Its representation, which is for each one of us a discovery of the world, of the past of societies, embraces all our passing or permanent opinions, so that the traces of our first questioning, our first emotions, remain indelible. It is these traces which we must know or rediscover, both our own and those of other peoples, in Trinidad as in Moscow or Yokohama. It is a journey both through time and space. It has the quality of reflecting moving images from the past, for it is not simply that this past is different for everyone, but that everybody's memory changes with time, and that these images alter as knowledge and ideologies develop and as the function of history changes within society. It is high time to confront these differing presentations of the past, for with the widening of the world's horizons, with its economic unification but continuing political disunity, our differing views of the past have, more than ever, become one of the factors in conflict between states, nations, cultures and ethnic groups. To control the past is to master the present, to legitimize dominion and justify legal claims. It is the dominant powers - states, churches, political parties, private interests - which own or finance the media or means of reproduction, whether it be school-books or strip cartoon, films or television programmes Increasingly, they are abandoning us all to a uniform past. Revolt comes from those to whom history is 'forbidden'. And then, tomorrow, which nation, which human group will still be able to control its own history? …….."

  • Slimslad  |  September 26 2012, 2:04PM

    "Some interesting stuff on the second one, if you take the time to browse." Mostly amateur "facts".

  • Slimslad  |  September 26 2012, 2:37PM

    "It is a clear and indisputable fact that the principal methodology of genocide in Cornwall is via the medium of an English 'ciuile education' whether this be within the formal educational system or the many facets of the opinion-creation media." "Clear and indisputable" only to a very small, (shrinking),number.

  • KernowGB  |  September 26 2012, 3:15PM

    @Slimslad (re Wednesday, September 26 2012, 2:04PM) Your opinion is noted, but whether you like it or not,"facts" are still "facts". If you consider your term of intended denigration, namely, "amateur" has any relevance, then I am sure that you will still refrain from substantiating your 'opinion' with some form of evidence-based argument rather than just, as you and your friends always do, resort to innuendo. ============================================== by Slimslad - Wednesday, September 26 2012, 2:37PM KernowGB said: - "It is a clear and indisputable fact that the principal methodology of genocide in Cornwall is via the medium of an English 'ciuile education' whether this be within the formal educational system or the many facets of the opinion-creation media." Slimslad said: - "Clear and indisputable" only to a very small, (shrinking),number." --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well done, my ansum! You have just unwittingly confirmed both "cause" and "effect" of Cornish Genocide. I shall be forever indebted to you for your sudden, but surprising, display of perspicacity.

  • Slimslad  |  September 26 2012, 4:47PM

    I am so pleased,(unwittingly, or otherwise), to have, (at least for the moment), eased the burden for you. It must be a strain.

  • CallingtonFox  |  September 26 2012, 6:48PM

    Who has a right to stake a claim to any part of this world? It is proven that humans have both travelled and settled in various places for tens of thousands of years. This is one world, fact. We only much later in our existence (I believe we can all accept we are as one in respect of being human), that we settled in groups. These groupings then clearly started to identify with particular geographic areas and low and behold you have the forming of countries. Then once an established affinity has occurred to a particular geographic area by its settlers anybody else from outside of that group coming in can be seen as an invader. Some 'invaders' come in peace, some do not, they come to supersede and impose their will. If you look at Great Britain as an example of supersedence by 'invasion', you can not fail to see that in actual fact not one of us can lay claim to being from original settlers. Cornwall, so we are lead to believe, was 'invaded' by Celts, Wales likewise and so was Ireland; Scotland was 'invaded' by the displaced Irish. We are all where we are simply because of 'invasion'. So who has the real right to lay claim to any part of these islands are their own? The reason we have countries is purely down to humankinds need to belong, to have a place where we can feel settled. This is natural of course but its ultimate outcome is one of conflict amongst us, either through non-violent or violent means. Is it not about time we sought to belong together, as one nation? Or do we truly wish to carry on looking to be separate, the only outcome of which is conflict in all its forms? United we stand.

  • KernowGB  |  September 26 2012, 7:32PM

    by Slimslad - Wednesday, September 26 2012, 4:47PM "I am so pleased,(unwittingly, or otherwise), to have, (at least for the moment), eased the burden for you. It must be a strain." ---------------------------------------------------------- NOooooo.... Not in the least! ============================================= by CallingtonFox - Wednesday, September 26 2012, 6:48PM [...] The reason we have countries is purely down to humankinds need to belong, to have a place where we can feel settled. This is natural of course but its ultimate outcome is one of conflict amongst us, either through non-violent or violent means. Is it not about time we sought to belong together, as one nation? Or do we truly wish to carry on looking to be separate, the only outcome of which is conflict in all its forms? United we stand." ------------------------------------------------------------------ I do not accept that the ultimate outcome is as you suggest. The conflicts that may exist is inevitably born out of greed and a lack of respect for others. The world is currently witnessing examples of where this greed is being unravelled in order to redress historical wrongs. Remove the greed and encourage respect and there is no reason why disparate peoples' cannot work together as distinct nations, but still work towards a common good. Having said all that, may I suggest that if you wish to continue in that vein, then you start a separate thread? However this may be achieved in practice, there will always be the need to coalesce into self-identifying territorial groups. It starts with the family. To think in terms of being 'one nation' (an irrelevant term to replace humankind) you are instantly into a worse form of Imperialism than the known examples throughout history.

  • youngcornwall  |  September 26 2012, 7:53PM

    by CallingtonFox "Is it not about time we sought to belong together, as one nation? Or do we truly wish to carry on looking to be separate, the only outcome of which is conflict in all its forms?" So true Graham, but there are a few who wish or think they are more Cornish than others, for some unanswerable reason best known to themselves, they strive for some kind of justice for Cornwall, not for the people of Cornwall, they don't know yet, because they have been deprived of the truth,so they say, if you can work it all out, please come back and put us all in the picture.

  • KernowGB  |  September 27 2012, 11:42AM

    @youngcornwall (re Wednesday, September 26 2012, 7:53PM) a) - "So true Graham"!!! Why is it the 'only' outcome??? b) - "for some unanswerable reason best known to themselves"!!!!!!! A truly classic statement from the head 'flawed-truth-seeker'-group, who started this thread and walked away from an intended (allegedly) 'truth-seeking' discussion. Find some answers here -- http://tinyurl.com/co5p5zc --------------------------------------------- "The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is. " Winston Churchill ---------------------------------------------

  • youngcornwall  |  September 27 2012, 12:16PM

    How about giving CallingtonFox a chance to come back, lets here from new blood for a change, if they dare venture any further, and quoting from war mongers helps no one, least of all your argument.

  • KernowGB  |  September 27 2012, 2:16PM

    @youngcornwall (re Thursday, September 27 2012, 12:16PM) No one is stopping CallingtonFox from coming back - it is an open forum! I just hope that it will be to stay within this thread's topic (remember it?), or start a new thread. That quote, that was introduced by one of your little group, was included solely for your benefit. :-) However, you must admit that it is a 'truism' irrespective of your opinion of its originator.

  • KernowGB  |  September 27 2012, 3:26PM

    @youngcornwall (re Thursday, September 27 2012, 12:16PM) I have just noticed your use of the plural, where you say, "and quoting from war mongers helps no one, least of all your argument", which, apart from being a totally subjective misrepresentation, seems to be a part of your usual mischievous and wilful attempt to create a negative scenario that is more symptomatic of the Rhinoceros technique of Cognitive Dissonance Denial (q.v. Saturday, March 31 2012, 12:59PM above).

  • Taxman100  |  September 27 2012, 4:31PM

    Callingtonfox. I agree entirely with your comment. I have concluded this thread relates to the expressed opinion/view of one individual; which is his right. However, there are others who find it has become rather tedious. Perhaps, in order to bring the discussion to an end it is for the others not to make further comments. There are a great many matters relating to Cornwall and the World at large that need to be aired openly on this Forum - the antics of the EU/EZ should certainly be of interest to those who live in the County?

  • CallingtonFox  |  September 27 2012, 4:56PM

    My post in its entirety is apposite to this thread. In it I asked who has the right to claim any part of this world? Are we not all where we are because of some form of 'genocide' using the arguments put forward by KernowGB? The tone of this debate is indeed one of conflict. Just as I pointed out. Separatism and segregation will only lead to conflict either physically violent or otherwise, this is a fact. 'Imperialism' was also brought into the arena. Empires occur through conflict perhaps even the form of 'genocide' stated as fact,that is mentioned throughout this thread. Empires can only exist if we take land which is not ours. I ask again, who truly has the right to claim any part of this world as their own? I also raised the point of invasions of Cornwall, Wales, Ireland and Scotland. If we accept the argument of 'genocide' as put forward by KernowGB and are clearly using this as a verbal weapon to help bring about the ends he desires then where should we stop and why? The invaders of all those places named above and their descendants should all have the decency to return from where they came and allow the truly native to come back. I have no idea where I will have to go to, or my wife, but hey let us all carry on with the separatist cause instead of perhaps stopping, thinking, taking stock and drawing a line in the present from where can all move of from. Divided we fall, fact.

  • Slimslad  |  September 27 2012, 6:35PM

    All these nationalists are asking us to do is to "take as read" that Cornwall is a "separate entity" from the rest of Britain. Like many areas of Britain, there are vestiges left by past "conquerors" in Cornwall. The nationalists know this, but tend to ignore the facts. I think this attitude might be described as... Cognitive Dissonance.

  • KernowGB  |  September 27 2012, 9:46PM

    @Taxman100 (re Thursday, September 27 2012, 4:31PM) But still no evidence-based counter argument to prove it incorrect! ================================================== by CallingtonFox - Thursday, September 27 2012, 4:56PM "My post in its entirety is apposite to this thread. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- You may wish to think so, but I am unable to take either of your postings, to date, seriously. You are, however entitled to hold such an opinion and debate it with those willing to join in any discussion with you about it on a separate thread. There is nothing in your posts that is in any way related, or relevant, to this thread topic, which is about determining the 'truth about Cornish Genocide' . You are simply presenting some fanciful and ideological retro-think, which has no real relevance to the here and now. Perhaps you would consider re-opening it on a new thread, where you could use it, say, to encourage the UN to withdraw its irrelevant 1948 Convention on Genocide and that all other Human Rights legislation should be abandoned, because they are also irrelevant, for the reasons that you have given above. =========================================== @Slimslad (re Thursday, September 27 2012, 6:35PM) Nice try, but simply more predictable 'avoidance'. because you have nothing of substance to say, or any evidence-based counter argument to prove it incorrect! In fact, you probably cannot even add any substantive evidence to prove your latest assertions, or place it in a comparative context to Cornwall. Clearly, you still do not understand how Cognitive Dissonance works. You basically continually just exhibit acute symptoms of it.

  • CallingtonFox  |  September 27 2012, 11:03PM

    KernowGB. Either you do not understand the relevance of my posts to your own position and its inherent flaws and hypocrisy or you are choosing to ignore it. Can you not see that you, just like the rest of us, live where we do because of 'invasion' and, in your words, genocide? Therefore if you wish to carry on with such a case I suggest you live by your own argument and go back to where your ancestors came from and allow the ones who were pushed out by your own ancestral genocide to come back. You can not pick and choose which bit of history you are going to live by. Either you address the entire problem or you endeavor to move forward having drawn a line from which to do so. That line, I suggest, should be the here and now. We have war because of separtism. You have also failed to provide any counter debate to my posts, which I find truly sad.

  • PaddyTrembath  |  September 27 2012, 11:21PM

    CallingtonFox wrote:- "Separatism and segregation will only lead to conflict either physically violent or otherwise, this is a fact." The "separatist" argument is often one that is used against Cornish Nationalism. It is an argument that is fundamentally flawed, in that it I know of no Cornish Nationalist who actually wants the sort of separation that those who use such arguments against us portray. We ask for recognition of our Nation, and a greater say in our own governance. We seek equality in the UK, not Borg like assimilation. There is no need for conflict, of any sort. We exist, we wish to continue to exist. You say "Divided we fall", and believe it or not, I agree with you, but creating one ****geneous unified mass is not the answer. United individuals working together, bring their own strengths and talents together, respecting each other as equals, and rejoicing in each others differences, will achieve far more than a group of "robots" who fear difference, and deviation from the accepted "norm".

  • Slimslad  |  September 28 2012, 8:47AM

    "I know of no Cornish Nationalist who actually wants the sort of separation that those who use such arguments against us portray." LOL

  • Slimslad  |  September 28 2012, 8:48AM

    Aesop's Fables? The fox and the grapes, I think?

  • youngcornwall  |  September 28 2012, 9:39AM

    by CallingtonFox "You can not pick and choose which bit of history you are going to live by. Either you address the entire problem or you endeavor to move forward having drawn a line from which to do so. That line, I suggest, should be the here and now." Following this commonsense way of thinking this is how things are now for the majority of the people living in Cornwall, it is the few that take their hobby that little bit too far that make a big thing (or try to) out of nothing. Genocide is still happening today in Cornwall so they say, how can you take these people seriously?

  • PaddyTrembath  |  September 28 2012, 9:54AM

    Watch out, theres a WASP about! :-)

  • Slimslad  |  September 28 2012, 11:43AM

    "it is the few that take their hobby that little bit too far that make a big thing (or try to) out of nothing." I think that sums up this thread quite nicely.

  • KernowGB  |  September 28 2012, 1:34PM

    by CallingtonFox - Thursday, September 27 2012, 11:03PM "KernowGB. Either you do not understand the relevance of my posts to your own position and its inherent flaws and hypocrisy or you are choosing to ignore it. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- I fully understand what you are getting at, but I do not see its relevance to my position. Now that you have made a definitive statement with your comment, "inherent flaws and hypocrisy" of my position, I can only say to you what I say to 'the others' please spell out what that means in practice by providing some evidence-based counter argument to what I have said to show that my argument has "inherent flaws and hypocrisy". ================================================= by CallingtonFox - Thursday, September 27 2012, 11:03PM Can you not see that you, just like the rest of us, live where we do because of 'invasion' and, in your words, genocide? ----------------------------------------------------------------------- You are expanding that assertion beyond the scope of this thread topic and into the realms of unprovable speculation and therefore not relevant. Each age has to resolve its own problems. ================================================= by CallingtonFox - Thursday, September 27 2012, 11:03PM Therefore if you wish to carry on with such a case I suggest you live by your own argument and go back to where your ancestors came from and allow the ones who were pushed out by your own ancestral genocide to come back. You can not pick and choose which bit of history you are going to live by. Either you address the entire problem or you endeavor to move forward having drawn a line from which to do so. That line, I suggest, should be the here and now. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- You have not yet shown that you even understand my argument, which you clearly do not. I do not "pick and choose which bit of history", I only deal in the "here and now", because that is the only aspect which has any relevance and legitimacy. Historical evidence serves only to confirm an ongoing trend of an abused right. Perhap a careful read of the aforegoing postings might clarify that aspect to you. ================================================= by CallingtonFox - Thursday, September 27 2012, 11:03PM We have war because of separtism. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Do we? Or is it because an Imperial Power does not respect that Nation's Right to its own desire for self-determination? Having said that, where is your evidence that this thread is about "separation"? It has not come from any of my argument! I only seek the recognition that the Cornish people are legitimately entitled to and a restoration of its suppressed constitution (hidden by lies and propaganda). Plus, of course, some honesty, integrity and transparency over the issues. ================================================= by CallingtonFox - Thursday, September 27 2012, 11:03PM You have also failed to provide any counter debate to my posts, which I find truly sad." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- That is purely because, as presented, you had not shown its relevance to this thread topic. I did draft out a reply to your post, which I would gladly post onto a separate thread, as a reply, if you choose to start a new topic as I originally requested, where its context could be maintained. However, it does seem that you have not really explained your point very well anyway, if your definitive statement above is really what this exchange is all about.

  • KernowGB  |  September 28 2012, 4:11PM

    by youngcornwall - Friday, September 28 2012, 9:39AM "[...] Genocide is still happening today in Cornwall so they say, how can you take these people seriously?" ------------------------------------------------------------------ By educating yourself???? Read the above!

  • Slimslad  |  September 28 2012, 7:09PM

    "that the Cornish people are legitimately entitled to and a restoration of its suppressed constitution (hidden by lies and propaganda)". Back to the old blokes from Redruth. Non-elected "parliament"

  • KernowGB  |  September 28 2012, 10:08PM

    @Slimslad (re Friday, September 28 2012, 7:09PM) And you still get it wrong after all this time. Unbelievable!

  • Taxman100  |  September 29 2012, 12:55PM

    It strikes me as odd when the word 'Cornish' is used, when the Cornish themselves, voluntarily, took part in many of ventures of the so called Imperial State. eg: There was no shortage of Cornish volunteers for service during the suppression of the Irish. Most people I have met have not the slightest interest in what may, or may not, have happened in antiquity - as what is said is all to often taken out of context and period. I am Cornish and I do not feel suppressed by the State, (except the wretched EU) and if Genocide was taking place, I am quite certain I would have heard about it, or suffered its consequences. No, I am still here unsuppressed and free as the bird in the sky, and no fears of being slaughtered in the night - except by criminals, who would soon discover my trusty shotgun remains amazingly accurate: even against moving targets! Foxes, Badgers, birds (including the Crow) and other wildlife are welcome, criminals are not.

  • PaddyTrembath  |  September 29 2012, 1:45PM

    Taxman100 wrote:- "It strikes me as odd when the word 'Cornish' is used, when the Cornish themselves, voluntarily, took part in many of ventures of the so called Imperial State." Poor argument, as there were also volunteers from every other group of people, from every part of the "Empire". In many cases, it was a case of volunteering for a job that would provide for them and their families, because the state was not prepared to provide other means for them to provide such support for themselves, and then being ordered to take part in the "ventures". Please remember there is a difference between British/Britain and English/England. Taxman100 wrote:- "eg: There was no shortage of Cornish volunteers for service during the suppression of the Irish" Again, poor argument, there was also no shortage of Irish volunteers supporting the suppression as well. It is also a poor argument because they did not exactly volunteer to suppress, in most cases they volunteered to join the services, and some of them got sent to Ireland. In fact, your argument is "out of context".

  • Taxman100  |  September 29 2012, 2:40PM

    PaddyTrembath. You are incorrect. Many Cornishmen volunteered to specifically suppress the Irish - the detail was clearly included in their recruitment documentation. They had a choice, and they made their choice. There was no shortage of alternative employment elsewhere at the time in question. The same is true of the ventures of what you call the Imperial State. The recruits had a choice - join or not join, and they chose the latter. I think you need to clarify: "Please remember there is a difference between British/Britain and English/England".

  • KernowGB  |  September 29 2012, 2:40PM

    @Taxman100 (re Saturday, September 29 2012, 12:55PM) What you need to bear in mind is the 19th century obsession with Empire coupled with the hegemonically contrived synonymy between Britain/England etc., that is still with us today, although, post Devolution, the English themselves are now having to distinguish the difference. Please see the posting above at (Friday, April 06 2012, 5:47PM). Your use of the "Imperial State" should not be confused with the virtual representation of the EIS, namely the "English Imperial State", which represents, and identifies, certain individuals and organisations that still support and promote the concept of an EIS in defending the genocidal, and illegal, status quo within our Cornish Duchy.

  • Slimslad  |  September 29 2012, 2:48PM

    Here we go again. "The English Imperial State" Which fits in very nicely with their other "Ludlumesque" organizations, like the "New World Order" and the Bliderberg Group". LOL

  • CallingtonFox  |  September 29 2012, 3:35PM

    By KernowGB; "I fully understand what you are getting at, but I do not see its relevance to my position. Now that you have made a definitive statement with your comment, "inherent flaws and hypocrisy" of my position, I can only say to you what I say to 'the others' please spell out what that means in practice by providing some evidence-based counter argument to what I have said to show that my argument has "inherent flaws and hypocrisy". ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Using your own argument that 'Cornish genocide' is occurring now at this moment in time is where your position is shown to be false and hypocritical. By choosing which bit of history you anchor your claims to you are ignoring the fact, established by research, that the original 'Cornish' people have already been displaced, absorbed or whatever other description you wish to use, is why you are here. 'Cornish genocide' using your own argument therefore is not happening now because it has already done so. Yet you feel it alright to use such inflammatory rhetoric to bolster your claim to this part of Great Britain and choose to ignore the fact you are here, again using your own argument, because of 'genocide'. That is why you are being hypocritical. by CallingtonFox - Thursday, September 27 2012, 11:03PM Can you not see that you, just like the rest of us, live where we do because of 'invasion' and, in your words, genocide? ----------------------------------------------------------------------- By KernowGB; "You are expanding that assertion beyond the scope of this thread topic and into the realms of unprovable speculation and therefore not relevant. Each age has to resolve its own problems." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Firstly historical research has established beyond all reasonable doubt that these islands have been settled, invaded and resettled time and time again since the last ice age. Secondly your statement that "each age has to resolve its own problems" is to choose from which point in history you want your truth to start from and is also hypocritical. By KernowGB; "You have not yet shown that you even understand my argument, which you clearly do not. I do not "pick and choose which bit of history", I only deal in the "here and now", because that is the only aspect which has any relevance and legitimacy. Historical evidence serves only to confirm an ongoing trend of an abused right. Perhap a careful read of the aforegoing postings might clarify that aspect to you." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- You are either going to use and therefore accept the use of history to prove your claims and likewise have it used against them or you do not, which is it to be? "I only deal in the "here and now"". If that is not picking and choosing I don't know what is. 'Here and now' is because of history or 'there and then'. And I have read your posts and information supplied in your links. That is why I am using your own arguments. If we are to have a true, open and honest debate of where we are now and how to move forward so that we can accommodate each other and our diversities we first need to draw a line from which to do so. We can not ignore history or pick and choose which bits to debate from and it does not help such a debate to use terms such as 'Cornish genocide'.

  • KernowGB  |  September 29 2012, 4:46PM

    @CallingtonFox (re Saturday, September 29 2012, 3:35PM) It seems that we are just going around in circles. Can you please put a timescale of when you consider your concept of Cornish Genocide 'actually' took place, and how it was achieved? Please do not use "invasion". Can you also explain what you consider to be happening in the 'here & now', where people who consider themselves to be 'Cornish' (and not English) are being subjected to policies and actions that coercively, and subliminally, lead to them (over time) into believing that they are 'English'? Can you also explain how that does or does not inter-relate to other similar situations with other national minorities within their respective Imperial States and the ongoing International Debate on "Rethinking Cultural Genocide" etc.? Also at what point is the 'There & Then' not a part of the 'Here & Now'? At what point is a nation destroyed or redefined? Your final paragraph has everything to commend it and with which I have every sympathy. However, It is, in my opinion correct that the wrongs that are being imposed upon those of us that consider ourselves to be Cornish and not English have to be confronted and acknowledged. You will, I am sure, have come across my recommendation that we pursue Thomas Hammarberg's advice (see posting at Wednesday, March 28 2012, 4:43PM). Your reference to accommodating 'each other' is an an acknowledgement of 'a problem' between two parties. My use of 'Cornish Genocide' correctly spells out the potential consequence, and intent, if that accommodation is not acknowledged and properly addressed.

  • Slimslad  |  September 29 2012, 7:02PM

    Perhaps you have met your match, Mr P. ? You still win on the supercilious verbiage front, of course.

  • CallingtonFox  |  September 29 2012, 10:45PM

    By KernowGB; "It seems that we are just going around in circles. Can you please put a timescale of when you consider your concept of Cornish Genocide 'actually' took place, and how it was achieved? Please do not use "invasion"." I am merely using your own reasoning and points to show that if indeed there was such a thing as 'Cornish genocide' it happened when the settlers who lived here became displaced or replaced by those who came after and also settled. One group of peoples often mentioned are the Celts, who may or may not have been a single race, came here from 'foreign parts' and took over. I do not know if it was they who caused the 'Cornish genocide,' to use your own arguments, or some other 'race'. But whoever it was it was those settlers who would have been responsible for the 'Cornish genocide.' Perhaps we could call them the 'New Cornish' and any subsequent settlers 'New, new Cornish' and so on? Either way there can be no current 'Cornish genocide.' However if you do wish to carry on down that road then it is indeed a flawed and hypocritical one. By KernowGB; "Can you also explain what you consider to be happening in the 'here & now', where people who consider themselves to be 'Cornish' (and not English) are being subjected to policies and actions that coercively, and subliminally, lead to them (over time) into believing that they are 'English'?" You can consider yourself to be what nationality you want to. But you are not the only one to have such a right. At least one contributor to this thread claims to be Cornish born and bred (Taxman100) I think, who considers himself to be an Englishman and Cornish, he says this part of Britain is also England. What about his rights? If you want to have a proper, open and honest debate then you have to address a great many questions from all sides. 'Cornish genocide' is both deeply inflammatory it also deeply subjective. Separatism is a truly dangerous ideal as proven by events in history. If you do wish to pursue a separate nation then you will have to address who has the right to live here and under what conditions. As an indicator of this I mention a caller to a BBC Radio Cornwall phone in I heard some months ago who said, and I have to paraphrase, that 'Cornwall should only be for those born and bred here and that they must only work here and only speak Cornish.' Where does that sentiment fit with you? I have posted what I have, in such ways as I have, to try and formulate a genuine debate and to create full thought processes.

  • KernowGB  |  September 30 2012, 11:58AM

    @CallingtonFox (re Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM) Just an acknowledgement at this time, but many thanks for that clarification and further comment. Unable to respond at the moment and I shall do so later this evening.

  • Slimslad  |  September 30 2012, 7:57PM

    "If you want to have a proper, open and honest debate then you have to address a great many questions from all sides. 'Cornish genocide' is both deeply inflammatory it also deeply subjective. Separatism is a truly dangerous ideal as proven by events in history." Very recent "events in history", Mr. P. If you want "genocide", look to post-Tito Yugoslavia.

  • KernowGB  |  September 30 2012, 10:53PM

    by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM I am merely using your own reasoning and points to show that if indeed there was such a thing as 'Cornish genocide' it happened when the settlers who lived here became displaced or replaced by those who came after and also settled. ---------------------------------------------- Since you do not respond to my request to state a timescale, I must assume that your reference to "settlers" relate to the first people to live within the territory that today we call Cornwall and that a subsequent group of people also came and settled within the same territory and displaced the first sttlers. At that time (I must again assume) you are identifying that displacement as the Cornish Genocide that I am talking about, based on, what you consider to be "my reasoning". The implication of that, if my assumption of your clarification is the correct one, is that any subsequent settlements of/by other groups (over time) can no longer be considered to be Cornish Genocide, because it has already happened and that the actions of further settlement cannot repeat that process by displacing that newer in-situ group. That seems to me to be an entirely untenable position to take. =========================================== by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM One group of peoples often mentioned are the Celts, who may or may not have been a single race, came here from 'foreign parts' and took over. ---------------------------------------------- Where is your evidence that they "took over", or whether such a scenario, as 'displacement' would even have existed at that time? ========================================== by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM I do not know if it was they who caused the 'Cornish genocide,' to use your own arguments, or some other 'race'. But whoever it was it was those settlers who would have been responsible for the 'Cornish genocide.' ---------------------------------------------- I fail to see where your opinions in any way represent my arguments, or by what evidence you choose to label what you are describing as 'Cornish' Genocide? ========================================== by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM Perhaps we could call them the 'New Cornish' and any subsequent settlers 'New, new Cornish' and so on? Either way there can be no current 'Cornish genocide.' ---------------------------------------------- One must assume that each group must identify and defend its own position against any perceived threat from others and that the process can possibly be repeated as many time as the pressure for population movement, or power-politics imposes itself. Therefore to say that genocide is essentially a 'one-off' phenomenon in the distant past is, quite obviously, a nonsense. If a group displaces the Cornish and that is, in your words, "Cornish Genocide", and we then have a new group called New Cornish, which is subsequently displaced by another group, then that is "New Cornish Genocide" and to the next phase which involves "New New Cornish Genocide" ad infinitum. It is the responsibility and prerogative of each threatened group to defend itself against what by any definition is Genocide ========================================== by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM However if you do wish to carry on down that road then it is indeed a flawed and hypocritical one. ---------------------------------------------- CONTINUED ON NEXT POSTING

  • KernowGB  |  September 30 2012, 10:54PM

    CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POSTING You say that you have read my evidence and argument above, in which case you may have noted that for genocide to exist, there needs to be certain markers in place. These are markers that enable the observer to be able to identify 'purpose' and 'intent', which in turn enables the observer to be able to differentiate between the natural assimilation of new settlers into the in situ whole by a process of natural evolution as the population coalesces into one territorial community, or the coercive integration through manipulating the population of the minority group into the majority (ie. Genocide). It is the latter process that is evidenced, by these markers, within our Cornish Duchy plus the fact that Cornwall is denied the institutions that would provide for its protection against this particular evil. I have to say that I do not see anything in what you have offered that in any way substantiates your allegation of my position as being flawed and hypocritical. ========================================== by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM You can consider yourself to be what nationality you want to. But you are not the only one to have such a right. At least one contributor to this thread claims to be Cornish born and bred (Taxman100) I think, who considers himself to be an Englishman and Cornish, he says this part of Britain is also England. What about his rights? ---------------------------------------------- He has rights already. I have none, other than the right to be able express my point of view! His view is based on a lie generated by official propaganda. ========================================== by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM If you want to have a proper, open and honest debate then you have to address a great many questions from all sides. 'Cornish genocide' is both deeply inflammatory it also deeply subjective. Separatism is a truly dangerous ideal as proven by events in history. ---------------------------------------------- Sadly, you seem to be cherry-picking which of my comments that you choose to respond to, and ignoring others. I fully accept that there are many issues that need to brought into any debate, but the first thing is to establish the principle that Cornish Genocide exists and to bring it out into the open. Genocide should not be considered inflammatory, and it certainly IS NOT subjective. It simply needs to be understood and within the context only of the groups involved, rather than knee-jerk responses based on complete ignorance, as exampled in many of the above postings by certain posters. ========================================== by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM If you do wish to pursue a separate nation then you will have to address who has the right to live here and under what conditions. As an indicator of this I mention a caller to a BBC Radio Cornwall phone in I heard some months ago who said, and I have to paraphrase, that 'Cornwall should only be for those born and bred here and that they must only work here and only speak Cornish.' Where does that sentiment fit with you? ---------------------------------------------- Nowhere! Please see my earlier comment about Thomas Hammarberg. ========================================== by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM I have posted what I have, in such ways as I have, to try and formulate a genuine debate and to create full thought processes." ---------------------------------------------- I truly appreciate your input to this debate and I regret not being able to agree with you over the actual point when genocide is perpetrated, but on both this and the previous posting, the latter portion is not too distant from my own. We have to move on in the 21st century, but this has to be with ALL the information on the table, open and transparent – warts and

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 01 2012, 1:46AM

    By KernowGB; "The implication of that, if my assumption of your clarification is the correct one, is that any subsequent settlements of/by other groups (over time) can no longer be considered to be Cornish Genocide, because it has already happened and that the actions of further settlement cannot repeat that process by displacing that newer in-situ group. That seems to me to be an entirely untenable position to take." I disagree entirely. In order to establish any rights to present claims we must establish from where those rights came. Your use of the description 'Cornish genocide' to back up your claims is based from certain time periods. Yet what you fail to realize is that as there has never been a 'right' to claim any part of this world as ones own. We only do so because of our need to 'belong' and have somewhere to live and provide for ourselves and our families. It is a conundrum which is only made worse if we continue down the same vein. It is time to stop the rot and actually start to accept we are just humans. It does not mean we stop being individuals. It is also worth pointing out that 'nationhood' is in itself a very tenuous ideal. It was within the lifetime of ancestors who I knew and your own who you knew, that they would have thought about their village or town as their 'nation.' If you read 'local' history books drawing material from around, for example, Great Britain, you will see that people rarely went beyond the boundaries of their own settlements and considered people from outside as foreigners. What you are actually raging against is natural human behaviour. Things change, either via conscious methods or just, simply because they do, we are not rocks we are conscious beings. Your idea of being Cornish right now will probably not be the same within a few decades. Culture changes, it takes and borrows and falls out of favour continuously. I agree, it can be painful for those left behind but none the less it is natural. Your idea of 'Cornish genocide' (which seems to be fine if it was your ancestors genocide that brought you and your 'culture' here), is to say the least deeply subjective. I do not doubt your feelings and belief that it is happening but I find the reasons dubious. However it is your right to air those grievances and I would hope that we could overcome them. by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM One group of peoples often mentioned are the Celts, who may or may not have been a single race, came here from 'foreign parts' and took over. ---------------------------------------------- By KernowGB; "Where is your evidence that they "took over", or whether such a scenario, as 'displacement' would even have existed at that time?" Like yourself I have gained such information from written works by authors who have researched this group of people. The 'scenario' of 'displacement' is taken from your own argument. 'Displacement', to clarify, both personally and culturally is factual. Otherwise nothing would have changed since the first settlers arrived. by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM I do not know if it was they who caused the 'Cornish genocide,' to use your own arguments, or some other 'race'. But whoever it was it was those settlers who would have been responsible for the 'Cornish genocide.' ---------------------------------------------- By KernowGB; "I fail to see where your opinions in any way represent my arguments, or by what evidence you choose to label what you are describing as 'Cornish' Genocide?" Then I suggest you reread my posts. I am actually using your arguments to point out its flaws. To be continued in following posts.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 01 2012, 1:52AM

    By KernowGB; "The implication of that, if my assumption of your clarification is the correct one, is that any subsequent settlements of/by other groups (over time) can no longer be considered to be Cornish Genocide, because it has already happened and that the actions of further settlement cannot repeat that process by displacing that newer in-situ group. That seems to me to be an entirely untenable position to take." I disagree entirely. In order to establish any rights to present claims we must establish from where those rights came. Your use of the description 'Cornish genocide' to back up your claims is based from certain time periods. Yet what you fail to realize is that as there has never been a 'right' to claim any part of this world as ones own. We only do so because of our need to 'belong' and have somewhere to live and provide for ourselves and our families. It is a conundrum which is only made worse if we continue down the same vein. It is time to stop the rot and actually start to accept we are just humans. It does not mean we stop being individuals. It is also worth pointing out that 'nationhood' is in itself a very tenuous ideal. It was within the lifetime of ancestors who I knew and your own who you knew, that they would have thought about their village or town as their 'nation.' If you read 'local' history books drawing material from around, for example, Great Britain, you will see that people rarely went beyond the boundaries of their own settlements and considered people from outside as foreigners. What you are actually raging against is natural human behaviour. Things change, either via conscious methods or just, simply because they do, we are not rocks we are conscious beings. Your idea of being Cornish right now will probably not be the same within a few decades. Culture changes, it takes and borrows and falls out of favour continuously. I agree, it can be painful for those left behind but none the less it is natural. Your idea of 'Cornish genocide' (which seems to be fine if it was your ancestors genocide that brought you and your 'culture' here), is to say the least deeply subjective. I do not doubt your feelings and belief that it is happening but I find the reasons dubious. However it is your right to air those grievances and I would hope that we could overcome them. by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM One group of peoples often mentioned are the Celts, who may or may not have been a single race, came here from 'foreign parts' and took over. ---------------------------------------------- By KernowGB; "Where is your evidence that they "took over", or whether such a scenario, as 'displacement' would even have existed at that time?" Like yourself I have gained such information from written works by authors who have researched this group of people. The 'scenario' of 'displacement' is taken from your own argument. 'Displacement', to clarify, both personally and culturally is factual. Otherwise nothing would have changed since the first settlers arrived. by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM I do not know if it was they who caused the 'Cornish genocide,' to use your own arguments, or some other 'race'. But whoever it was it was those settlers who would have been responsible for the 'Cornish genocide.' ---------------------------------------------- By KernowGB; "I fail to see where your opinions in any way represent my arguments, or by what evidence you choose to label what you are describing as 'Cornish' Genocide?" Then I suggest you reread my posts. I am actually using your arguments to point out its flaws. To be continued in following posts.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 01 2012, 1:55AM

    Continued. ByKernowGB; "One must assume that each group must identify and defend its own position against any perceived threat from others and that the process can possibly be repeated as many time as the pressure for population movement, or power-politics imposes itself. Therefore to say that genocide is essentially a 'one-off' phenomenon in the distant past is, quite obviously, a nonsense." But to 'defend' ones own position one has to accept to have it questioned. If you wish to be selective in the reasoning and historical time scales of such a position then others will use it against you. I am trying to get you to see that your position can not be taken in isolation from the positions of others. To clarify; I said that 'Cornish genocide' happened when the original settlers where displaced, subsumed or whatever by new settlers, welcome or otherwise, who came after them. The original settlers and their descendants, using your own arguments, would be the true claimants to nationhood of this part of Great Britain. But since they have been absorbed, displaced and so on, the 'Cornish genocide' has already happened. Those who caused this and those who came after, again, using your own arguments, therefore are usurpers. By KernowGB; "If a group displaces the Cornish and that is, in your words, "Cornish Genocide", and we then have a new group called New Cornish, which is subsequently displaced by another group, then that is "New Cornish Genocide" and to the next phase which involves "New New Cornish Genocide" ad infinitum. It is the responsibility and prerogative of each threatened group to defend itself against what by any definition is Genocide" And it is because you wish to pick and choose from where your 'truths' come that you are going to go round and round in circles. Further, the words 'Cornish genocide' are your own, I am only using them to unpick your arguments. By KernowGB; "You say that you have read my evidence and argument above, in which case you may have noted that for genocide to exist, there needs to be certain markers in place. These are markers that enable the observer to be able to identify 'purpose' and 'intent', which in turn enables the observer to be able to differentiate between the natural assimilation of new settlers into the in situ whole by a process of natural evolution as the population coalesces into one territorial community, or the coercive integration through manipulating the population of the minority group into the majority (ie. Genocide). It is the latter process that is evidenced, by these markers, within our Cornish Duchy plus the fact that Cornwall is denied the institutions that would provide for its protection against this particular evil." You are clearly failing to prove your points which are, as I have already stated, deeply subjective. I might add, purely for informative purposes, that what you believe is happening is in actual fact noting more than 'natural progression,' something which is natural and occurs the world over. It might not be nice, I know I do not always like change, but it is (sometimes sadly) a part and parcel of life and of having to share the planet with other people. To be continued.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 01 2012, 1:56AM

    Continued. by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM You can consider yourself to be what nationality you want to. But you are not the only one to have such a right. At least one contributor to this thread claims to be Cornish born and bred (Taxman100) I think, who considers himself to be an Englishman and Cornish, he says this part of Britain is also England. What about his rights? ---------------------------------------------- By KernowGB; "He has rights already. I have none, other than the right to be able express my point of view! His view is based on a lie generated by official propaganda." That is a subjective statement that is not proven. Again I have read the information you supplied and will acknowledge ambiguity within an historical context. But it does not prove your claims. by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM If you want to have a proper, open and honest debate then you have to address a great many questions from all sides. 'Cornish genocide' is both deeply inflammatory it also deeply subjective. Separatism is a truly dangerous ideal as proven by events in history. ---------------------------------------------- By KernowGB; "Sadly, you seem to be cherry-picking which of my comments that you choose to respond to, and ignoring others. I fully accept that there are many issues that need to brought into any debate, but the first thing is to establish the principle that Cornish Genocide exists and to bring it out into the open. Genocide should not be considered inflammatory, and it certainly IS NOT subjective. It simply needs to be understood and within the context only of the groups involved, rather than knee-jerk responses based on complete ignorance, as exampled in many of the above postings by certain posters." I have responded to the entire thrust of your debate. Do you disagree that separatism has been proven by history and continues to be proven is a dangerous ideal? By KernowGB; "Cornish Genocide exists and to bring it out into the open. Genocide should not be considered inflammatory, and it certainly IS NOT subjective. It simply needs to be understood and within the context only of the groups involved…" I disagree with this statement for the reasons already given elsewhere. by CallingtonFox - Saturday, September 29 2012, 10:45PM If you do wish to pursue a separate nation then you will have to address who has the right to live here and under what conditions. As an indicator of this I mention a caller to a BBC Radio Cornwall phone in I heard some months ago who said, and I have to paraphrase, that 'Cornwall should only be for those born and bred here and that they must only work here and only speak Cornish.' Where does that sentiment fit with you? ---------------------------------------------- By KernowGB: "Nowhere! Please see my earlier comment about Thomas Hammarberg." But that still does not cover my point. If you wish to pursue a separate nation you will have no choice but to address such claims as the one I heard on BBC Radio Cornwall among many, many others. To be continued.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 01 2012, 2:04AM

    By KernowGB; "I truly appreciate your input to this debate and I regret not being able to agree with you over the actual point when genocide is perpetrated, but on both this and the previous posting, the latter portion is not too distant from my own. We have to move on in the 21st century, but this has to be with ALL the information on the table, open and transparent – warts and" I agree with this statement 100% it is all I have been trying to achieve all along.

  • youngcornwall  |  October 01 2012, 9:14AM

    This emptiness wanting to be something special or different must be some kind of phobia I would have thought, what other explanation can there be? Are we being a little unkind to those who are convinced genocide is being inflicted on the people living in Cornwall today, maybe we should be grateful we do not have to carry this burden on our shoulders, or are we all blind, because this so called genocide is happening throughout the country and we cannot see it?

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 01 2012, 5:37PM

    by youngcornwall; "This emptiness wanting to be something special or different must be some kind of phobia I would have thought, what other explanation can there be? Are we being a little unkind to those who are convinced genocide is being inflicted on the people living in Cornwall today, maybe we should be grateful we do not have to carry this burden on our shoulders, or are we all blind, because this so called genocide is happening throughout the country and we cannot see it?" Clearly there are genuinely held grievances but it is the reasoning behind them that is, to say the least, muddy. The whole picture must be looked at and dissected in order to find solutions to all points whether it is to prove them false or to agree they are not and then move towards resolving the problems. If a separate nation or state is to be born then the consequences are enormous for those who live there currently. We only have to look to recent history to see the results of separatism. It is naïve to think everything would be hunky-dory. Separatism is and always will be, inherently dangerous to all involved. Societies come and go some by aggression and some by taking on board new ideas and ways. It is normal and natural human nature.

  • KernowGB  |  October 03 2012, 4:14PM

    Post 1 of 4 by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:52AM I disagree entirely. In order to establish any rights to present claims we must establish from where those rights came. Your use of the description 'Cornish genocide' to back up your claims is based from certain time periods. Yet what you fail to realize is that as there has never been a 'right' to claim any part of this world as ones own. We only do so because of our need to 'belong' and have somewhere to live and provide for ourselves and our families. It is a conundrum which is only made worse if we continue down the same vein. It is time to stop the rot and actually start to accept we are just humans. It does not mean we stop being individuals. ------------------------------------- Since you do not qualify what it is that you actually disagree with it is rather difficult to respond directly to it. You also seem intent on responding in a way that looks at the issues from a philophical point of view that "there has never been a 'right' to claim any part of the world as one's own". That may well be true, but the human condition, through greed and power politics, does not follow that idealogical path. This is why we have disputes over territory and peoples' rights, which have the ability to be repeated time after time over different 'time-periods'. You say that it is time to "stop the rot and accept that we are just humans", but you do not elaborate on how this would be achieved, or, why it is 'the Cornish' that should initiate such an action rather than the external agencies that drive it. May I suggest that it can only be achieved by 'everyone' having a genuine respect for other people's rights. ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:52AM It is also worth pointing out that 'nationhood' is in itself a very tenuous ideal. It was within the lifetime of ancestors who I knew and your own who you knew, that they would have thought about their village or town as their 'nation.' If you read 'local' history books drawing material from around, for example, Great Britain, you will see that people rarely went beyond the boundaries of their own settlements and considered people from outside as foreigners. ------------------------------------- I cannot accept that our recent ancestors, despite the truth of what they may have perceived as 'their world, because of the lack of ability to travel, would have identified their town/village as "their nation" and the use of 'foreigner' within that context is simply to mean someone that was unknown, or from 'another place'. (q.v. Cornwall http://tinyurl.com/8mtnvpr ) ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:52AM What you are actually raging against is natural human behaviour. Things change, either via conscious methods or just, simply because they do, we are not rocks we are conscious beings. Your idea of being Cornish right now will probably not be the same within a few decades. Culture changes, it takes and borrows and falls out of favour continuously. I agree, it can be painful for those left behind but none the less it is natural. ------------------------------------- I was not aware that I was "raging" about anything, but simply attempting to bring some evidence-based truth into the frame about what is going on in Cornwall. Whilst you may philosphically class what is happening as "natural human behaviour", you seem to be excluding (from discusion) a critical element within your opinions, namely, how that behaviour is influenced by the greed and power politics of others – invariably in a more dominant position. It is the right of everyone so negatively affected by this (departure from the philisophical ideal?) to resist and reject this irrespective of what 'time-period' it may relate to. ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:52AM Continued on next posting

  • KernowGB  |  October 03 2012, 4:18PM

    Post 2 of 4 Continued from previous posting Your idea of 'Cornish genocide' (which seems to be fine if it was your ancestors genocide that brought you and your 'culture' here), is to say the least deeply subjective. I do not doubt your feelings and belief that it is happening but I find the reasons dubious. However it is your right to air those grievances and I would hope that we could overcome them. ------------------------------------- This is obviously a stumbling point for you/us, therefore, may I suggest that you actually refer to some of the evidence that I use to support my argument and identify what it is about it that you consider to be subjective? I identify myself as 'Cornish' based on the historically recorded existence of a Cornish people over the past 1200 years, and potentially longer than that. The process of Cornish Genocide has been in place, arguably throughout that period, because of the actions of English imperialistic aspirations, but more identifiable from actions that seemed to come into play during the 16th & 17th centuries. This had the effect of making the Cornish almost 'invisible' to outward perception. The existence of the Cornish Duchy preserved the Cornish people's perception of themselves as 'Cornish', but the real pressure on the Cornish identity, although subject to many of the techniques of genocide did not come until the 20th century post war population explosion, which has made assimilation of incomers impossible, because Cornwall has been denied the institutional protections that needs to be in place to do so and the genocide is ongoing as a consequence. ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:52AM Like yourself I have gained such information from written works by authors who have researched this group of people. The 'scenario' of 'displacement' is taken from your own argument. 'Displacement', to clarify, both personally and culturally is factual. Otherwise nothing would have changed since the first settlers arrived. ------------------------------------- Once again, I would be grateful for some links/source references so that I can relate to your observations within context. Since 'displacement' is not a term that I have ever resorted to in any of my argument, I fail to understand how you can attribute it to my "own argument". I have no doubt that things would have changed, over time, there is no suggestion as to whether or not that might have represented a good or bad thing. I accept that change is a natural evolutionary process. My argument is how that change may be influenced and manipulated by external forces to the detriment of Cornwall and the Cornish Nation within their national territory, namely, the Cornish Genocide. ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:52AM Then I suggest you reread my posts. I am actually using your arguments to point out its flaws. ------------------------------------- If you are using "my arguments", then I should be able to recognise it as such. I do not, with the best will in the world recognise any such direct relationship. ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:55AM But to 'defend' ones own position one has to accept to have it questioned. If you wish to be selective in the reasoning and historical time scales of such a position then others will use it against you. I am trying to get you to see that your position can not be taken in isolation from the positions of others. ------------------------------------- I am not sure why you might consider that I am not prepared for my position to be questioned. Neither do I consider that I am being "selective" other than just putting forward the 'Cornish' Case as it exists for what history identifies as the Cornish people. Continued on next posting

  • KernowGB  |  October 03 2012, 4:21PM

    Post 3 pf 4 Continued from previous posting Others, if they so wish are invited to counter this with evidence-based argument and to show where what I am saying is wrong and why it is wrong. That is the only reason that I am posting on this forum, because of the way it was started and its alleged intention. ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:55AM To clarify; I said that 'Cornish genocide' happened when the original settlers where displaced, subsumed or whatever by new settlers, welcome or otherwise, who came after them. The original settlers and their descendants, using your own arguments, would be the true claimants to nationhood of this part of Great Britain. But since they have been absorbed, displaced and so on, the 'Cornish genocide' has already happened. Those who caused this and those who came after, again, using your own arguments, therefore are usurpers. ------------------------------------- The territory that is now known as 'Cornwall', which has its own 'Cornish' language and its people are identified as Cornish was determined in the first half of the !0th century. It had an existence and history prior to that time, but not necessarily coextensive to its modern delineation. I take the time from the first half of the 10th century as the only marker of origin for my argument, because it is a consistent territorial identity. Since that time Cornwall and the Cornish peole have had a distinctive place in history. Before that time the events are less clear. You persist in imposing the concept of "displaced, subsumed or whatever", but there is no evidence to substantiate that and any 'settlers' that might have moved into Cornwall, because of the existence of external rule would have been sufficiently small to have been absorbed/assimilated (over time) into the Cornish whole, with no negative consequences for the integrity of the evolving Cornish community. ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:55AM And it is because you wish to pick and choose from where your 'truths' come that you are going to go round and round in circles. Further, the words 'Cornish genocide' are your own, I am only using them to unpick your arguments. ------------------------------------- I am not "picking and choosing", as you suggest, I am taking a position of defending the rights of a human group that identifies itself, and has been identifies, as such, by others, as 'Cornish' from the time when that term came into use. I cannot argue for any period that came before that, because there is no evidence to substantiate what I might wish to say, but the Cornish, by whatever name, obviously existed before that time. The Cornish identity is being manipulated by a process imposed by external coercion, for which examples (of partial success) are stated in above postings. Irrespective of whether or not there has been some unidentifiable processes of 'displacement', 'absorbtion', 'usurpation' or 'genocide' during the period of prehistory, the currently identified process is relevant as a process of 'Cornish' genocide, which is ongoing and insidious. ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:55AM You are clearly failing to prove your points which are, as I have already stated, deeply subjective. I might add, purely for informative purposes, that what you believe is happening is in actual fact noting more than 'natural progression,' something which is natural and occurs the world over. It might not be nice, I know I do not always like change, but it is (sometimes sadly) a part and parcel of life and of having to share the planet with other people. ------------------------------------- With respect, I feel that neither are you proving yours, because we have this stumbling block of whether or not the actions of genocide are repeatable for different circumstances over different time-periods by different people-groups. Continued on next posting

  • KernowGB  |  October 03 2012, 4:28PM

    Post 4 of 4 Continued from previous posting As I have suggested elsewhere, I have made some specific statements and shown evidence that point to events that provide an indication of purpose and intent and identify who it is that I consider to be culpable in both 'initiating', and actually, complicit in 'driving' the process. ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:56AM That is a subjective statement that is not proven. Again I have read the information you supplied and will acknowledge ambiguity within an historical context. But it does not prove your claims. ------------------------------------- It was never intended to be anything other than subjective, because I do not wish to be specific about individuals. Perhaps we can agree that because there is an 'English' State, now subsumed within a United Kingdom State, for anyone to identify themselves as 'English' (the national majority) is to use an identity that is protected and promoted by the State. That is not true of anyone that identifies themselves as 'Cornish' (an unrecognised national minority), because that is not an identity that is protected and promoted by the State because the Cornish State (namely, The Duchy of Cornwall) is suppressed as an English administrative county. As you have said, "You can consider yourself to be what nationality you want", which is true, but it is the context of use that is important. Those who identify themselves as Cornish & English immediately relegates the being Cornish component to a degraded status, because they are, in truth 'competing' national identities. A similar state of affairs exists when people classify themselves as 'English' and 'British' where these are – inadvertently? - used as competing national identities. What is worse ( and indicative of complicity in Cornish Genocide) is the form of abuse that the Cornish/English group level at those of us that seek to defend the existence of an unambiguous Cornish identity whether this arises from historical long-standing or adopted, because of gradual assimilation. The Cornish/English group represent the process of Cornish Genocide at work, whereas the Cornish/British group represent a 'Cornish' national having 'British' citizenship. ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:56AM I have responded to the entire thrust of your debate. Do you disagree that separatism has been proven by history and continues to be proven is a dangerous ideal? ------------------------------------- I have already commented on your observation about "separatism", which you have chosen not to come back on. It is an item that you wish to bring into the discussion, but not something that I have any particular interest in, for the reasons that I have given previously. As a basic statement it has, historically, been shown to be fraught with problems, but what is really important, as I see it, is what has made it so, and does it need to be? Why is it, in fact, of any relevance to a discussion on Cornish Genocide? ===================== by CallingtonFox - Monday, October 01 2012, 1:56AM But that still does not cover my point. If you wish to pursue a separate nation you will have no choice but to address such claims as the one I heard on BBC Radio Cornwall among many, many others. ------------------------------------- I hope that you will agree that we can only proceed one step at a time and any discussion on recovering the rightful status of the Cornish nation is something for a mature discussion some time in the, hopefully, not too distant future. There is one certainty that it will have to meet all the requirements of international law and rights that exist at the time. I am only looking at drawing attention to current wrongs that urgently need to be addressed and resolved. The future can only rest with the will and sovereignty of the people.

  • KernowGB  |  October 04 2012, 11:10AM

    I feel that I should clarify that in the previous four postings from KernowGB that the individual quotes and associated comments do not directly follow-on from each other, as it may appear from the attempt to 'limit' an already excessive amount of text. To check the context of each quoted item, therefore, it would be necessary to go to the original posting (as date/time stamp) by CallingtonFox. If I may suggest? The easiest way to do that is to also open up the thread in a second browser.

  • Slimslad  |  October 05 2012, 9:31AM

    "But that still does not cover my point. If you wish to pursue a separate nation you will have no choice but to address such claims as the one I heard on BBC Radio Cornwall among many, many others." "If you do wish to pursue a separate nation then you will have to address who has the right to live here and under what conditions. As an indicator of this I mention a caller to a BBC Radio Cornwall phone in I heard some months ago who said, and I have to paraphrase, that 'Cornwall should only be for those born and bred here and that they must only work here and only speak Cornish.' Where does that sentiment fit with you?" A question Mr P. will never answer.

  • KernowGB  |  October 05 2012, 10:54AM

    @Slimslad (re "A question Mr P. will never answer." Friday, October 05 2012, 9:31AM) ---------------------------------------- Intelligent reading still beyond you, then? Just more, typical, diversionary trolling!

  • Slimslad  |  October 05 2012, 12:25PM

    A question Mr P. will never answer.

  • KernowGB  |  October 05 2012, 1:26PM

    The question was answered in my post in response, namely, ""Nowhere! Please see my earlier comment about Thomas Hammarberg." In a following post CallingtonFox commented that it did not address his point. He had not ask me to "address his point". The principle outlined is not disputed. To address his point is an entirely different matter, on something not directly related to the topic of this thread (if it were paraphrased correctly), but a matter for the future, which was the context of my 2nd reply in my subsequent post to that point (or principle) being made. Please read, and understand your own (and other's) comment. You have therefore completely missed two answers, which is not surprising in the least considering your past mischievous interuptions to posts on this, and other threads.

  • Slimslad  |  October 05 2012, 2:00PM

    More supercilious verbiage. If Callington Fox is still waiting for an answer, then no answer has been given. "A question Mr P. will never answer."

  • Slimslad  |  October 05 2012, 7:31PM

    But, in the big scheme of things, what does this debate prove? To me, it proves that some folk have far too much time on their hands, and their "world" shrinks to what they feel is "important" to them. Around them, life goes on, regardless.

  • youngcornwall  |  October 05 2012, 8:35PM

    "But, in the big scheme of things, what does this debate prove?" It proves that this thread is approaching 500 postings and to be honest without the longwinded postings we wouldn't have got this far, getting over their opinion what the truth is cannot be said in a few words so it seems, blinding with science seems to be their order of the day. Way back up the thread I asked this straightforward question, has there been a straightforward answer, not on your Nelly, unless you know different that is? by youngcornwall Saturday, April 21 2012, 6:14PM "OK KernowGB, please tell us in what way shape or form, are the people of Cornwall being disadvantaged today, now at this moment in time, with this genocide that is supposed to be happening according to you".

  • KernowGB  |  October 05 2012, 10:04PM

    @youngcornwall (re Friday, October 05 2012, 8:35PM) An answer to you was, of course, given to you in my post at (Saturday, April 21 2012, 8:40PM), but I hope that others will not just accept your rather patronising, and self-aggrandising POV and pop back to the post that you referred to and then continue reading on, plus some prior to that post. They will then see how much information that I have (and had) provided that you, and your friends, simply ignored and chose to continue with your troll-like activities and obviously negative agenda, before you walked away from your own thread. There is enough information in my postings above to answer all of your questions, but you now have to do the legwork yourselves. Now do a count of posts with 'useful information' and compare that with the 'time-wasting posts' of you and your friends and let us know what you come up with?

  • Slimslad  |  October 06 2012, 8:50AM

    Mr P. should have been a politician., (albeit of the extreme variety). Long-winded, rude, and supercilious, he would make a good Tory.

  • youngcornwall  |  October 06 2012, 9:09AM

    KernowGB Just answer the question, look at it as a platform for getting your message over, I thought you would jump at such an opportunity, you never know who reads these threads some new reader may be interested who knows, or is it your argument is so weak and flimsy that you have to use a multitude of words to try and bemuse people? by youngcornwall Saturday, April 21 2012, 6:14PM "OK KernowGB, please tell us in what way shape or form, are the people of Cornwall being disadvantaged today, now at this moment in time, with this genocide that is supposed to be happening according to you".

  • KernowGB  |  October 06 2012, 11:37AM

    @youngcornwall (re Saturday, October 06 2012, 9:09AM) If anyone is interested they will read the thread from top to bottom and not behave in the way that you and your friends do. You have all walked away from discussing what has already been provided and just indulge in time-wasting tactics. Others come along and emulate your stance, which leads one to presume that they are simply sock-puppets. The argument is not weak and flimsy. If it were, you would be only too ready to jump at the chance to prove it to be so, but you have no real answers to it other than to 'deny', 'denigrate' and 'divert' whilst using the opportunity to try and create negative stereotypes of 'the messenger' and others not directly associated with this topic. As I have said before to you and others, the answers to your questions are in your own hands and actions. Why do none of you take the opportunity that is freely open to you to resolve your own dilemma? Nevertheless, since you do not even concede that genocide can exist outside of the UN Convention, coupled to the fact that you, and your friends, confirm that you are 'English' (because you consider that Cornwall is 'in England'), then how would you even recognise the existence of the processes, that I have identified, as Cornish Genocide. You implied that YOU were interested in 'the Truth', but what have you to demonstrate that as being a genuine objective? Absolutely nothing!

  • KernowGB  |  October 06 2012, 12:47PM

    Another piece of the Cornish jigsaw http://tinyurl.com/98n57ls .

  • Slimslad  |  October 06 2012, 1:06PM

    "Another piece of the Cornish jigsaw"? By an independent source. LOL

  • youngcornwall  |  October 06 2012, 1:11PM

    "You implied that YOU were interested in 'the Truth', but what have you to demonstrate that as being a genuine objective? Absolutely nothing!" And you seem to have taken over this thread with your take on things, let me remind you of the topic once again…"Cornish Genocide and the Truth? What do you know or what do you care, do you have an opinion you would like to share?"....What you are in the process of doing is trying to defend your "opinion" and making a right hash of it I must say. Now do the gentlemanly thing and give us your opinion in a straightforward gentlemanly manner, regarding genocide and the people of Cornwall Today, so we can all fight this together IF there is something to fight. by youngcornwall Saturday, April 21 2012, 6:14PM "OK KernowGB, please tell us in what way shape or form, are the people of Cornwall being disadvantaged today, now at this moment in time, with this genocide that is supposed to be happening according to you".

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 06 2012, 1:51PM

    For what it's worth I am not done yet. Also I wish to point out that I am my own person with my own thoughts and have done my own research. I am beholden to nobody whether I agree with them or otherwise. I am looking for nothing but the truth and wish for nothing but sensible and non-aggressive outcomes. I have far more to add but am still in the process of writing it.

  • KernowGB  |  October 06 2012, 2:43PM

    CallingtonFox, thank you for that update and I look forward to reading what you might have to say. I am sure that your objectives are shared by all.

  • Taxman100  |  October 08 2012, 11:17AM

    KernowGB. Try as I might I simply cannot accept your comments relating to Cornish Genocide. As far as my research is concerned there is no evidence, from an independent source, which would support your beliefs - which seems to have taken on the form of an extreme religious belief. Is it possible you are actually referring to the watering down of the 'Cornish Gene' by natural selection and evolution; for which you blame the EIS? I would also question why a single individual believes he has the right to attempt to control a Forum, or why he would wish to do so - unless for political or religious gain. Surely, it is time this thread was laid to rest, and others be allowed to hold a discussion on matters of concern to them, without constantly being usurped by this tiresome individual thread! I assume this comment will soon be removed?

  • youngcornwall  |  October 08 2012, 12:47PM

    All I can see left for this thread is for it to break through the 500 postings barrier, everything has been said that is going to be said I would have thought, unless someone can pull something out of the bag at this late stage, and I would doubt that very much, who else is going to be soft enough to try and tell the world that the people of Cornwall are being subjected to genocide?

  • KernowGB  |  October 08 2012, 4:46PM

    @Taxman100 (re Monday, October 08 2012, 11:17AM) Real research would be valid if it set out to prove that me and my evidence are incorrect, or correct. Fortunately CallingtonFox is making a genuine attempt to do just that, So, be patient! You say: ------------------------------ "Is it possible you are actually referring to the watering down of the 'Cornish Gene' by natural selection and evolution; for which you blame the EIS?". ------------------------------ Such things, if they exist are in evidence for every single human group on this planet, not just the 'Cornish'. Within humanity nothing 'just happens', when people, power politics, social engineering, manipulation, and corruption are involved. How can an individual control a forum unless it is a Troll that is seeking to undermine real debate, or attempt to get the thread closed. No one is forced to respond to this thread, or even read it, but more importantly it is rather disingenuous to suggest that people are denied an opportunity to have a discussion on any topic of their choice. So how does your concept of "control a forum" thing work? Your choice of phrase "extreme religious belief" is an interesting one, which works two ways, does it not? Why do you assume that your comment will be removed?

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 09 2012, 4:15PM

    Ok, let me try another tack. As I understand it, KernowGB, believes that Cornwall is, was, and should be recognized as, a nation in its own right. He believes that the 'Cornish nation' has been oppressed and is being deliberately destroyed via a form of genocide that has been and is being, practised by the English and anyone else who does not recognize said 'genocide.' Via various posts and links he has sought to enlighten us as to his cause and indeed others who are of his persuasion. I am now going to use his posts from the beginning of this thread and add my response to them. I have not quoted all his posts in order to avoid unnecessary repetition. by KernowGB Tuesday, March 27 2012, 11:11AM Lemkin's definition (for everyone's consumption and edification) contained in his "Axis Rule in Occupied Europe" (1944) was: "Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups. Genocide is directed against the national group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in their individual capacity, but as members of the national group." "Genocide has two phases: one, destruction of the national pattern of the oppressed group; the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor. This imposition, in turn, may be made upon the oppressed population which is allowed to remain or upon the territory alone, after removal of the population and the colonization by the oppressor's own nationals." [Achieved by a number of "Techniques" listed as]: • Political • Social • Cultural • Economic • Biological • Physical: •••••• Endangering Health •••••• Mass Killing • Religious • Moral" My response; An article used that shows the strength of conviction of KernowGB (among others I accept). No doubt can be left in our minds that he does indeed believe his 'Nation' is being destroyed. At this point no evidence is given to back up his implied claim. To be continued in next post...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 09 2012, 4:16PM

    Continued... by KernowGB Tuesday, March 27 2012, 12:42PM The Cornish existed on this island long before the existence of the word 'English' or 'England'. Nevertheless, genocide is applied to 'groups' that self-identify as, for example, 'Cornish' . It is a territorial epithet having a very long history - in fact a unique history - within which, and to which, others, over time would/will assimilate given the respect and rights that should inalienably be theirs. Who could unambiguously define an English person today? Cornwall is a nation, in the same way that England, Scotland and Wales are nations. Yet any attempt to destroy these groups would still be categorised as genocide. My response; Again no evidence is yet given to back these claims up but I will deal with the points raised. We know from archaeological discoveries that what is now known as Cornwall was occupied during the stone-age, bronze-age through the Iron-Age and beyond probably by settlers originating from northern Europe. But as no known written records exist directly from them their culture and lives remain obscure. It is widely accepted that a people known as Celts settled in many parts of Britain including Cornwall. From 'Cornwall, A History' by Philip Payton I quote the following; "…leaving aside the powerful ideological motives of the revivalists in wishing to locate the Cornish identity in a Celtic origin there is for us the additional complication that archaeologists, historians, linguists and anthropologists cannot themselves agree a definitive answer to the question 'who were and are the Celts?'. "The idea that there is (or was) a model Celtic type is absurd (vide the widely different literary descriptions of the Celts ranging from tall, fair and blonde to short, swarthy and dark…" Indeed although it is clear a race of peoples was living in Cornwall all evidence points to them being in clans ruled over by various kings or chieftains. I will return to this later. But what we see so far is not a 'nation' but settlements that may well have common bonds but are not homogenous. As for "Who could unambiguously define an English person today?" I say in the same ways we would be able to define anyone living in these islands; that is that we are all a mixture of various so called races and peoples from many places in our pasts. To be continued in next post...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 09 2012, 4:20PM

    Continued... by KernowGB Wednesday, March 28 2012, 11:39PM He/they say no genocide, but they cannot prove it. I say 'yes' genocide and can prove it. However, they have not yet passed key stage 1 of the learning process." My response; This statement came without evidence and was later backed up with statements but no definitive prove. I will come back to this later. by KernowGB Thursday, March 29 2012, 5:57PM The State lies about the true constitutional position of Cornwall as a Royal Duchy and not and English county, which instantly devalues the postion and rights of the Cornish nation within the island and beyond. The propaganda use of "English" national symbolism with the Duchy both political, social and commercial. The consistent attacks on the integity of the Cornish national border with England. The unnacceptable population growth within the Duchy, which serves to marginalise the Cornish people and Cornish culture. My response; When the Roman invasion came, (if it can be fully accepted as such because Roman occupation happened with a great deal of indigenous cooperation), Britain was divided into administrative districts. From 'A History of Cornwall' by Ian Soulsby I quote the following; "In A.D 80 the new Roman governor, Agricola, initiated a process of administrative reorganisation by which each recognisable tribal unit became a self governing region or Civitas. In the south west the regional capital was fixed at Exeter, then Isca Dumnomorium, a name which points to the developing identity of the whole peninsula. To the Romans the inhabitants of Cornwall, Devon and west Somerset were the Dumnonii, the descendants of the Iron Age Celtic settlers who had absorbed the older Bronze Age population." This is not the only source to show 'an identity' being formed but none show the settlers as one nation. Another quote from the same source; "While the written evidence of the nature of Dumnonium administration has survived, if it ever existed at all, a possible pattern has been gleaned from the study of inscriptions, place names and later chroniclers, all considered in the light of what is known in other regions. Professor Thomas has envisaged a tribal system of authority which was perhaps based on a continuation of the Roman Pagi system whereby the whole region was divided into a number of districts or Pagi, each with its own Regulus or Chieftain. Above the petty Dumnonian rulers would have been the regional king and the names of several have survived." Districts as part of a region of Roman rule. Not a nation and not ruled without cooperation by the people themselves. But if you want 'Cornish genocide' then surely this was it? To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 09 2012, 4:30PM

    The Roman occupation of Britain ceased in 410A.D. Britain was the name given by them to this island as far north as Scotland and from east to west coasts. They recognized it as one country. It is important to note at this time in history that experts agree a substantial emigration took place from Cornwall to what we know as Brittany in modern day France. From the same book I quote; "In the north and north-west of Brittany lay the province or Kingdom of Dumnonia, while in the south was Cournouaille (in Breton, Kernes or Kernew), indisputable evidence of South-West Britain in their creation" It is clear that power struggles took place during the following centuries until A.D 936 when Athelstan defined the area we now know as Cornwall but it was still under Anglo-Saxon rule. It is also clear from studying this time period that a greater distinction of Cornwall and its people came about because of the Anglo-Saxons themselves. Another quote from 'Cornwall a History' regarding a state of Cornwall predating "not only the emergence of the English state but also the arrival of the English themselves", He goes on to say this; "But there is a paradox, for a Professor Davies reminds us, despite the deep seated Celtic tendency to regard the English as the Johnny-come-lately interlopers in these islands, the English nation-state was in fact one of the first to emerge. Thus: 'nowhere arguably are these issues of more historical and contemporary significance than in the British Isles. Nowhere in medieval Europe was the potential of a nation-state realised at an earlier date than in England…" Then we have the Norman Conquest which supersedes the Anglo-Saxon or, as the Cornish called them, the English. The same book introduces a Professor Markale who discerns a link between the Norman Conquest, the Breton presence, the renewed accommodation of Cornwall he said "In fact, it is agreed that about one third of William's army at Hastings was made up of Breton nobility and foot soldiers. Many of them received land in Devon and Cornwall…" I now refer you back to an earlier time in history where we saw the founding of Britanny and the Bretons in France by settlers who came from Cornwall. In other words what we see is the Cornish coming back to Cornwall to help the Normans take control. So on that point alone if we are to accept the existence of a current Cornish genocide it is one of their own doing through support of a Norman rule of Britain. They did, and willingly so, take part in this conquest and by doing so accepted rule by a King who now controlled what can only be considered as Norman England. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 09 2012, 4:33PM

    Continued... Now, regarding Cornwall as a county: First the creation of a County Council in the 19th century was a purely administrative one. Locally elected people serving their locality and should not be confused with the county as a district. Before I go forward to the Reign of Edward the 3rd I wish to add this; Regarding the Duchy, 'Cornwall a History' has this to say; "The Duchy grew out of the earlier Earldom of Cornwall which was itself a singular institution and appears to have been created as an accommodating successor to the earlier line of Cornish chieftain kings." Moving on to the reign of Edward the 3rd (r 1327-1377) he revived the languished Cornish earldom as a Duchy in March 1337. I transcribe below much of the charter which brought the Duchy into being. The full charter can be found in 'Carew's Survey of Cornwall' by Sir Richard Carew first published in 1602 and is taken from the Charter Roll of the 11th year of the reign of Edward 3rd No.53, preserved among the Records of the Court of Chancery. The grant to Edward, Duke of Cornwall and Earl of Chester, the Kings Son, of the Sheriffalty, and divers castles, manors &C. in Cornwall and Devon, reciting his creation to the Dukedom. The King to his Archbishops, &C, Greeting. Know ye, that whereas We being lately desirous to honour the person of our beloved and faithful Edward, Earl of Chester, our first begotten son, have, with the unanimous assent and advice of the Prelates, Earls, Barons, and others of our council, in our present Parliament assembled at Westminster on Monday next after the feast of St. Mathias the Apostle last past, given to our said Son the name and honor of Duke of Cornwall, and have created him Duke of Cornwall, and have girt him with a sword, as it is meet; and that he may be able to maintain the state and honour of a Duke, according to the dignity of his birth, and the more easily to support the expenses incumbent in that behalf, We have given and granted by our charter, for us and our heirs, to our said Son, under the name and honor of Duke of the said place, the sheriffalty of Cornwall, with the appurtenances, and the castle, borough, manor and honor of Launceston, with the park there and other appurtenances, in the counties of Cornwall and Devon; the castle and manor of Tremarton, with the town of Saltash, and the park there, and their other appurtenances , in the Counties aforesaid; the castle, borough, and manor of Tintagel, with the appurtenances, in the said County of Cornwall; the castle of Restormel, with the park there, and their appurtenances in the same county…………….. To be continued....

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 09 2012, 4:35PM

    Continued... I have the full transcript but it continues in the same vain naming places and means of income all within the County of Cornwall. Later however it goes on to say the following; '…..except only 1000 marks, which we have granted for us and our heirs, to our beloved and faithful William de Montacute, Earl of Salisbury, to be received by him and the heirs made of his body lawfully begotten, from the issues and profits of the coinage aforesaid, under a certain form in our other charter to the same Duke, and to the first begotten sons of his and his heirs, Kings of England, and Dukes of the said place in the Kingdom of England, hereditarily to succeed: together with the Knights fees, advowsons of churches, abbies, priories, hospitals, chapels, and with the hundreds, fisheries, forests, chaces, parks, woods, warrens, fairs, markets, liberties, free customs, wards, reliefs, escheats and services of tenants, as well free as native, and all other things to the aforesaid castles, towns, manors, honor, stannary, coinage, lands, and tenements, howsoever and wheresoever belonging or appertaining; together with certain other manors, lands and tenements, in divers other counties of our Kingdom, of us and our heirs for ever, as in our said other charter is more fully contained. We, being willing to do more ample favour to the aforesaid Duke in his behalf, for the more abundant support of such honour, have granted for us and our heirs, Kings of England, Dukes of the said place in the Kingdom of England, hereditarily to succeed for ever…..' It then ends as follows; These being witness, the most venerable fathers, John, Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all England, our Chancellor; Henry, Bishop of Lincoln, our treasurer; Roger, Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry; Thomas, Earl of Norfolk and Marshal of England, and our most dear uncle; Richard, Earl of Arundell, and Thomas, Earl of Warwick; Thomas Wake de Lydell, John de Mowbray, John Darcy le Neven, steward of our household, and others. Given by our hand at Westminster, the eighteenth day of March. By the King Himself and the whole Council in full Parliament. The lawful King of the time who was there because of the help of a people originally from Cornwall and whose Parliament would have contained members from his entire Kingdom including Cornwall recognises Cornwall as a county of England despite the Dukedom. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 09 2012, 4:46PM

    Continued... Cornwall has sent M.P's to the Westminster Parliament since its inception. Therefore and up to the present time have accepted and acquiesced in it being a part of England. I suggest that what is being perceived as 'genocide' is no more than a natural progression of a people within a part of a larger nation towards self-caused and/or acquiesced changes. Finally I will deal with a Cornwall being separate from England whether as part of Great Britain or otherwise. What if Cornwall were to get the chance to become independent? I, and other, have asked questions of those who would support such a move. KernowGB will not answer these questions because he feels it not yet time to do so. If anyone who wishes to advocate or pursue an independent Cornwall they surely owe it to those who live here to explain what it would entail, in full. Such questions as 'who would have the right to live here and under what conditions? Before they pursue their cause. End.

  • youngcornwall  |  October 10 2012, 9:17AM

    Thank you Graham for your time and effort, now we wait for the self-appointed historians to do their nitpicking to try and save some face.

  • KernowGB  |  October 10 2012, 11:15AM

    @CallingtonFox (re Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:15PM et seq) That is certainly something to get my teeth into, for which I thank you. As each response seems to be getting exponentially larger than the one that it responds to, I shall provide my response on a separate pdf document to which I shall provide a weblink. This will limit the forum text to a minimum.

  • Slimslad  |  October 13 2012, 8:04PM

    "This will limit the forum text to a minimum." As if you were were worried before about long-winded text. Thank you, Graham.

  • youngcornwall  |  October 13 2012, 8:45PM

    Now this has to be thought out well Slim. Someway or another our Cornish genocide expert is going to tell us how this Cornish genocide is being administered to the people of Cornwall today without them even knowing about it, this must be worth waiting for without a doubt.

  • KernowGB  |  October 16 2012, 10:59PM

    KernowGB said - Wednesday, October 10 2012, 11:15AM "@CallingtonFox (re Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:15PM et seq) That is certainly something to get my teeth into, for which I thank you. As each response seems to be getting exponentially larger than the one that it responds to, I shall provide my response on a separate pdf document to which I shall provide a weblink. This will limit the forum text to a minimum." ----------------------------------------------------------------- This link -- http://tinyurl.com/9gbemmn -- will take you to my response to your postings above. MY closing comment in that response, I also post here, namely: I genuinely appreciate the time and effort that you are putting into this topic, which truly makes a refreshing change from the mischievous 'one liners' from the off-stage hyenas scavenging off any tit bits that can be picked up to further their own personal agenda. However, I feel that you are avoiding commenting on the real issues and principles involved in this topic, by seeking, on the one hand, to excuse the existence of the process as being 'natural progression', whereas on the other hand, you are also attempting to show that the process is something that the Cornish have brought upon themselves. What is missing seems to be the crucially objective factor that asks the question: What if KernowGB is CORRECT?

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 16 2012, 11:38PM

    KernowGB: Whilst it is clear we have some fundamental differences of opinion, that I feel would stand a far better chance of a proper resolution if we ever have the chance of a properly convened public debate, I am pleased that we can be civil and repsectful towards each other. I am going to respond to your reply via pdf. But I really wish you would respond to this; "If anyone who wishes to advocate or pursue an independent Cornwall they surely owe it to those who live here to explain what it would entail, in full. Such questions as 'who would have the right to live here and under what conditions? Before they pursue their cause." As you must be aware, becoming independent is viewed with many far reaching differences of opinion as to what it entails. It can NOT be ignored. If you wish to bring about a Nation you MUST let people know how it will affect them.

  • Truro_Kernow  |  October 16 2012, 11:42PM

    Didn't India return MPs to Westminster and the now free Eire? Will Scotland bother once they vote for freedom? I doubt it! Kernow bys vyken!

  • KernowGB  |  October 17 2012, 3:07PM

    @CallingtonFox (re Tuesday, October 16 2012, 11:38PM) But I really wish you would respond to this; "If anyone who wishes to advocate or pursue an independent Cornwall they surely owe it to those who live here to explain what it would entail, in full. -------------------------------------------------- Many thanks for such a quick comeback and I look forward to reading your pdf, when prepared. With regard to your specific point that I have quoted here: You are seeking to discuss what course of action would need to be followed, if the topic here were, as it is with Scotland, a move to Independence. That is an entirely different matter to that which I am presenting, and which you are challenging. It does not have, and should not have, any bearing on the form of discussion, or its outcome in an academic discussion on Cornish Genocide. It can only relate to the politics of the time if/when such an occasion might arise. The existence of the Cornish people is either true (and provable) or not true (and provable). The existence of Cornish Genocide is either true (and provable) or not true (and provable). If you feel that what you ask is relevant to this discussion, then I would ask you to explain, how my response to it would affect how your input to this discussion might be influenced.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 17 2012, 3:33PM

    Hi KernowGB. In response to your feelings regarding the discussion of Cornwall's independence I have started a new thread. I hope you will respond to it.

  • KernowGB  |  October 17 2012, 4:18PM

    @CallingtonFox (re Wednesday, October 17 2012, 3:33PM) Your insistence on pushing this aspect of your participation in this topic is becoming - If I may say it? - more than a little suspicious. I have no interest in 'independence', I have no interest in discussing it. It is not even on any Cornish agenda that I am aware of, but I now have a deeper interest in trying to understand why you choose to start a new thread on it, rather than directly responding to my previous post!!!!? My last post posed a thought for you to respond to and I hope that you will feel able to respond directly to that.

  • youngcornwall  |  October 17 2012, 5:08PM

    by KernowGB "Your insistence on pushing this aspect of your participation in this topic is becoming - If I may say it? - more than a little suspicious." Just trying to flush out some kind of understanding I would say, what makes someone like you tick, who is so adamant that genocide is being carried out on the people of Cornwall today, with this thread marching on, it must be said you do not have many supporting your theory, that on its own is very encouraging to say the least.

  • KernowGB  |  October 17 2012, 6:59PM

    @youngcornwall (re Wednesday, October 17 2012, 5:08PM) I must say that there are a lot like you! If younare honest, that cannot be very comforting for you though.

  • youngcornwall  |  October 17 2012, 7:31PM

    @KernowGB It is not me who has put their head on the block, you have stood up and are being counted, not me, and a certain amount of credit must go your way it must be said. If only you could come up with a little bit of good wholesome evidence appertaining to genocide and Cornwall today or in living memory even, that would help no end, but just keep pussyfooting around, is not helping yourself or Cornwall one little bit.

  • KernowGB  |  October 17 2012, 8:02PM

    Time alone will be the judge! :)

  • youngcornwall  |  October 18 2012, 9:48AM

    @KernowGB Yes time will be the "judge" but does Cornwall have the time? This spanner in the works regarding this genocide of yours, if you do not come up with some good evidence to substantiate your claim that the people of Cornwall today are being subjected to genocide, it is not helping Cornwall one iota, in fact it is making the job that much harder for Cornwall to do whatever the people of Cornwall want to do. This thread should not be allowed to die with this nasty undercurrent claim of genocide of yours still being blasted around the world, it only makes the people of Cornwall look silly and a laughing stock.

  • KernowGB  |  October 18 2012, 12:37PM

    @youngcornwall - Thursday, October 18 2012, 9:48AM From a personal point of view, I could ask for nothing more than that. Yes, people! Stop! And Think! As to the last two points of your post: Is it? Does it? If they do not have all the right information, they can only make the wrong choices for our "Cornish Duchy". I would urge everyone to listen to the arguments and ask yourself: Are they: A - arguing for progress with 'Cornish' constitutional legitimacy, 'Cornish' Rights, and 'Cornish' history in mind, or, B - are their arguments defending the status quo, of 'an English administrative county'. and perpetuating the suppression of Cornwall's constitutional legitimacy (and Rights) as one of the indigenous national peoples of Britain, Europe and the World. How will anyone know who is ultimately correct? Then I commend you to read Slimslad's comment posted at Wednesday, September 26 2012, 2:37PM above, where he spelt out, very precisely, the consequence of the 'cause & effect' of Cornish Genocide, namely: ---------------------------------------------- "Clear and indisputable" only to a very small, (shrinking),number." ----------------------------------------------

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 18 2012, 11:30PM

    Post in response to KernowGB's pdf: I am unable to convert my file to a pdf. so have had to respond this way. KernowGB's pdf. is linked in a recent post above. CallingtonFox; I am now going to use his posts from the beginning of this thread and add my response to them. I have not quoted all his posts in order to avoid unnecessary repetition. KernowGB Comment: Does the final comment imply that you will be progressively going through all my posts on this topic, or restricting this and any further comment, to only the posts "from the beginning of this thread" that you have quoted? CallingtonFox's response; Before I responded to this thread I had already read through all your and others posts contained in it. •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:15PM KernowGB said - Tuesday, March 27 2012, 11:11AM Lemkin's definition (for everyone's consumption and edification) contained in his "Axis Rule in Occupied Europe" (1944) was: "Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups. Genocide is directed against the national group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in their individual capacity, but as members of the national group." "Genocide has two phases: one, destruction of the national pattern of the oppressed group; the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor. This imposition, in turn, may be made upon the oppressed population which is allowed to remain or upon the territory alone, after removal of the population and the colonization by the oppressor's own nationals." [Achieved by a number of "Techniques" listed as]: • Political • Social • Cultural • Economic • Biological • Physical: • Endangering Health • Mass Killing • Religious • Moral Response by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:16PM An article used that shows the strength of conviction of KernowGB (among others I accept). No doubt can be left in our minds that he does indeed believe his 'Nation' is being destroyed. At this point no evidence is given to back up his implied claim. KernowGB Comment: I can confirm that I do believe it, and passionately. However, you do include a statement in your opening remarks, above, which regrettably misrepresents anything that I have ever said, namely, "is being, practised by the English…" Perhaps your use of that phrase needs to be substantiated? CallingtonFox's response; Your use of phrases such as 'English Imperialism' and other such words are the reasons for what I said do I seriously need to repeat them? See below also for a direct example. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 18 2012, 11:33PM

    Continued.. KernowGB Comment: Most people are totally unaware of the existence of Cornish Genocide and I only point the finger where it can be shown that culpability truly exists. This is unequivocally the Crown & State, but institutionalised and hegemonically driven by an inertia of English Imperialism. However, once the issue is made known, I believe, that there is then a definite element of complicity implicit upon those that fail to acknowledge that fact but instead unquestionably , and vociferously, defend the status quo. CallingtonFox's response; How do you know what most people are aware of? Do you assume most people are ignorant? Have you not thought that maybe they just do not agree with you at all, that for them you have proved nothing? If you truly believe or better still have unequivocal proof that the Crown and the State have and are still carrying out or allowing to happen, 'Cornish genocide' then show it to everyone. Do you expect to be taken seriously if you think that over a 1000 years of Crown and State involvement in Cornwall that a 'genocide' would not be obvious by now, that decent people with Cornish sympathies over all those centuries have allowed it to happen, in secret? KernowGB Comment: You start with my posting of Lemkin's definition of Genocide and make the point that, "At this point no evidence is given to back up his implied claim." Since that posting was in direct response to posts by Slimslad, no evidence was necessary other than what was posted, and you are making a spurious 'out of context' observation on it - albeit a subjectively correct one, if you ignore an earlier poster's attempt to tell them where to find out more information. It does, nevertheless, stand as part of various items that cumulatively represent legitimate evidence to support my arguments, and necessary to post it for others to see within the context it was posted. CallingtonFox's response; I posted what I did to show a source that you use to illustrate your idea of 'Cornish genocide'. I read your sources and they do not show me evidence, let alone proof, of your claims of 'Cornish genocide' •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:16PM KernowGB said: - Tuesday, March 27 2012, 12:42PM •ï€ The Cornish existed on this island long before the existence of the word 'English' or 'England'. •ï€ Nevertheless, genocide is applied to 'groups' that self-identify as, for example, 'Cornish' •ï€ It is a territorial epithet having a very long history - in fact a unique history – •ï€ within which, and to which, others, over time would/will assimilate given the respect and rights that should inalienably be theirs. •ï€ Who could unambiguously define an English person today? •ï€ Cornwall is a nation, in the same way that England, Scotland and Wales are nations. •ï€ Yet any attempt to destroy these groups would still be categorised as genocide. Response by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:16PM Again no evidence is yet given to back these claims up but I will deal with the points raised. KernowGB Comment: You seem to be addressing your comments to others, and your reference to "again no evidence" still ignores previous attempts to point the 'deniers' to where they could find some evidence, so that they might, at least, have come back with some 'considered' responses. Yes! Even 'considered' opinions. CallingtonFox's response; Not only did I give you proof and sources as to why your first bullet point above is incorrect I also say again, that I have and am continuing to look for proof that you are right, (for I do NOT fear the truth), but as yet I have seen nor found any. The other posters can speak for themselves. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 18 2012, 11:36PM

    Continued... •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:15PM We know from archaeological discoveries that what is now known as Cornwall was occupied during the stone-age, bronze-age through the Iron-Age and beyond probably by settlers originating from northern Europe. But as no known written records exist directly from them their culture and lives remain obscure. It is widely accepted that a people known as Celts settled in many parts of Britain including Cornwall. From 'Cornwall, A History' by Philip Payton I quote the following; "…leaving aside the powerful ideological motives of the revivalists in wishing to locate the Cornish identity in a Celtic origin there is for us the additional complication that archaeologists, historians, linguists and anthropologists cannot themselves agree a definitive answer to the question 'who were and are the Celts?' "The idea that there is (or was) a model Celtic type is absurd (vide the widely different literary descriptions of the Celts ranging from tall, fair and blonde to short, swarthy and dark…" Indeed although it is clear a race of peoples was living in Cornwall all evidence points to them being in clans ruled over by various kings or chieftains. I will return to this later. But what we see so far is not a 'nation' but settlements that may well have common bonds but are not homogenous KernowGB Comment: I still remain unclear, and mystified, as to why you wish to dwell on this [Celtic] aspect of history, and prehistory, or its relevance to what I offer as evidence to support what I identify as 'Cornish Genocide'. It would have been helpful if you had stated , which of the above 'seven' points it specifically related to, because it seems to address none of them. Nevertheless, since you use the quote that you do, to draw the conclusion "what we see so far is not a 'nation'", perhaps you consider it to be relevant and, as you imply all will become clearer later? CallingtonFox's response; You raised the Celts in an earlier post. If you did not want them dealt with later on then you should not have used them to make a point which was a part of this topic. I will make no apology for using historical facts; we are here because of them. Facts, I will add, that do not back up your claim of 'Cornish genocide' actually quite the opposite. Take note of history and the proof (not conjecture or maybe's) and things do indeed become clearer. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 18 2012, 11:41PM

    Continued... •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:15PM As for "Who could unambiguously define an English person today?" I say in the same ways we would be able to define anyone living in these islands; that is that we are all a mixture of various so called races and peoples from many places in our pasts. KernowGB Comment: As a response to my point that is probably a truism, but it is also an opt-out of giving a definitive response to the point that I made, which itself was an indirect response to another poster's obsession with urging/challenging someone to first define 'a Cornish person', as a prerequisite for the concept of 'Cornish' genocide to be considered valid. Such a question is inevitably posed, when it seeks an answer that is intended to confuse, because you would get a different response from probably every individual that you ask to give 'their own definition'. That would possibly be true for whatever group were the focus. However, what you have chosen to ignore is the specificity of the question and the context within which it was posed. It is also a failure to understand how genocide (or any abuse of minority rights) is applied, as referred to (by Lemkin) in the first example that you quoted above, and any other definition of a people-group. CallingtonFox's response; I have not ignored or failed to understand how Lemkin's definition of genocide works. Believe me, I understand what he wrote. But I do not see any proof of it happening here in Cornwall. If I could then I would back you up, but I see no proof and I am not the only one. I do see a natural progression of an entire society which is at this stage simply through acting as humans act. There is no hidden agenda. •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:20PM KernowGB said: - Wednesday, March 28 2012, 11:39PM He/they say no genocide, but they cannot prove it. I say 'yes' genocide and can prove it. However, they have not yet passed key stage 1 of the learning process." Response by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:20PM This statement came without evidence and was later backed up with statements but no definitive prove. I will come back to this later. KernowGB Comment: You do not enlighten us as to what would be considered to be "definitive proof", so I will again have to be patient. However, I must again record that neither have you yet definitively proven your own position Does your 'observation' only apply to KernowGB posted comment? CallingtonFox's response; Are you having us all on? You honestly do not know what 'definitive proof' means? Let me use an analogy; If I say to you that I know of the existence of a plan to replace all human life-forms with robots you would surely expect me to show you the proverbial smoking gun(s) such as government documents or perhaps recordings of those who plan the replacement speaking unequivocally about said plan. That would be definitive proof. As for me not definitively proving my position I am the only one of us to have actually provided you with expert proof and historical proof, with sources. My observations are mainly in response to you as a key contributor to this thread. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 18 2012, 11:51PM

    Continued... •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:20PM KernowGB said: - Thursday, March 29 2012, 5:57PM The State lies about the true constitutional position of Cornwall as a Royal Duchy and not an English county, which instantly devalues the postion and rights of the Cornish nation within the island and beyond. The propaganda use of "English" national symbolism within the Duchy both political, social and commercial. The consistent attacks on the integity of the Cornish national border with England. The unnacceptable population growth within the Duchy, which serves to marginalise the Cornish people and Cornish culture. Response by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:20PM When the Roman invasion came, (if it can be fully accepted as such because Roman occupation happened with a great deal of indigenous cooperation), Britain was divided into administrative districts. From 'A History of Cornwall' by Ian Soulsby I quote the following; "In A.D 80 the new Roman governor, Agricola, initiated a process of administrative reorganisation by which each recognisable tribal unit became a self governing region or Civitas. In the south west the regional capital was fixed at Exeter, then Isca Dumnomorium, a name which points to the developing identity of the whole peninsula. To the Romans the inhabitants of Cornwall, Devon and west Somerset were the Dumnonii, the descendants of the Iron Age Celtic settlers who had absorbed the older Bronze Age population." This is not the only source to show 'an identity' being formed but none show the settlers as one nation. Another quote from the same source; "While the written evidence of the nature of Dumnonium administration has survived, if it ever existed at all, a possible pattern has been gleaned from the study of inscriptions, place names and later chroniclers, all considered in the light of what is known in other regions. Professor Thomas has envisaged a tribal system of authority which was perhaps based on a continuation of the Roman Pagi system whereby the whole region was divided into a number of districts or Pagi, each with its own Regulus or Chieftain. Above the petty Dumnonian rulers would have been the regional king and the names of several have survived." Districts as part of a region of Roman rule. Not a nation and not ruled without cooperation by the people themselves. But if you want 'Cornish genocide' then surely this was it? To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 18 2012, 11:53PM

    Continued... KernowGB Comment: You have not given any indication, evidence or argument as to why, what you are describing, in the period predating the arrival of the proto-English, or even proto-Cornish may be termed "Cornish Genocide". Overlordship does not, itself, imply or impose a process of genocide, even if this is with cooperation or tacit support. The purpose of the above quotes seem intended to repeat a conclusion with regard to "NOT a nation" during the Roman period and my response must be the same as on the previous occasion regarding 'the Celtic/pre-history period'. It is not relevant! If you consider that it is, then perhaps you could clarify why you consider that it is. CallingtonFox's response; I have described the period of history above because you can not have a now without a past. If you ignore history then you are ignoring the reasons for us being where we are now and under what conditions we are living. By using historical facts regarding the settlement of this Island we are able to establish whether Cornwall was a separate nation in or a part of another. I have continued to give you proof that Cornwall was not a nation. It was tribally ruled like the rest of Britain by peoples who no expert agreement has been reached as to exactly who they were. It became a nation when England came into being and this position was accepted and strengthened by the people of Cornwall themselves through actions and acquiescence in many forms. Therefore IF Cornish genocide ever happened it certainly is not happening now. •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:30PM "The Roman occupation of Britain ceased in 410A.D. Britain was the name given by them to this island as far north as Scotland and from east to west coasts. They recognized it as one country. It is important to note at this time in history that experts agree a substantial emigration took place from Cornwall to what we know as Brittany in modern day France. From the same book I quote; "In the north and north-west of Brittany lay the province or Kingdom of Dumnonia, while in the south was Cournouaille (in Breton, Kernes or Kernew), indisputable evidence of South-West Britain in their creation" KernowGB Comment: That is a rather simplistic account, which is quoted without providing any context over reasons or timescale, or why it is "important to note". I suspect that we might have different reasons for considering that it is important, apart from the obvious reason that it illustrates the historic socio-political inter-relationship between what became known as Brittany and Cornwall. CallingtonFox's response; Again I was using historical facts to establish why we are where we are now. It is you who continue to claim Cornwall was and is a nation I have shown you why this idea is incorrect. With regard to my words 'Important to note' I would have thought it was obvious in the light of later events in our history. I showed that people from Cornwall colonised a part of France and later returned to help install a new king of England an England to which they returned to and along with the ones whose ancestors had stayed, was a part. It was accepted by them and was helped by them to have happened. We are where we are now is because of their direct and deliberate part in securing England as a lasting nation. It was the culmination of centuries of tribalism being homogenised into one national whole that became strong and stable. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 18 2012, 11:55PM

    Continued... •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:30PM It is clear that power struggles took place during the following centuries until A.D 936 when Athelstan defined the area we now know as Cornwall but it was still under Anglo-Saxon rule. It is also clear from studying this time period that a greater distinction of Cornwall and its people came about because of the Anglo-Saxons themselves. KernowGB Comment: This is an interesting observation, but slightly ambiguous. What precisely does the phrase, "but it was still under Anglo-Saxon rule", mean, or intended to imply? Likewise, I feel that it would be helpful if you also could clarify what the "greater distinction of Cornwall and its people" is for which, presumably, we should be thankful/grateful to the Anglo-Saxons? CallingtonFox's response; Cornwall was under Anglo-Saxon rule. It seems clear that a lot of autonomy via tribal rulers was allowed but as long as Anglo-Saxon overrule was accepted. I am not trying to say anyone should be 'grateful' but what happened is a fact, it has caused and shaped us and our Island. The Anglo-Saxons were no different to any other settlers in a new land just as those who have been given the blanket name of Celts were when they settled in Cornwall and absorbed the natives. We should be careful to view and assess these things without using modern eyes in judgement. Here and now is because of there and then. to be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 19 2012, 12:09AM

    Continued... •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:30PM Another quote from 'Cornwall a History' regarding a state of Cornwall predating "not only the emergence of the English state but also the arrival of the English themselves", He goes on to say this; "But there is a paradox, for a Professor Davies reminds us, despite the deep seated Celtic tendency to regard the English as the Johnny-come-lately interlopers in these islands, the English nation-state was in fact one of the first to emerge. Thus: 'nowhere arguably are these issues of more historical and contemporary significance than in the British Isles. Nowhere in medieval Europe was the potential of a nation-state realised at an earlier date than in England…" KernowGB Comment: This is another comment for which its relationship to my argument and evidence is not shown, nor clarified. It also, in my opinion, does not reflect the context within which it is offered as a 'paradoxical' quote - as a perusal of its pre & post text in 'the book' reveals. I must add that it would be too much to add all that text to this discussion, but which may be found in the opening pages of chapter 5 on - please note! – "Anglia et Cornubia". I shall, however, provide two relevant quotes, also from page 71, which might throw some balance and context into this 'not a nation' comment that is presented, namely (my highlighting): "As both R. R. Davies and Professor Anthony D. Smith agree, while 'Nationalism'as the ideology that underpins the modern nation-state may be a recent construct, ethnic identities and communities (which Smith called ethnie) pre-date the modern world? The early emergence of the English nation-state, therefore, should not blind us to the existence of other ethnie in the British Isles (or indeed to differences and divisions within England itself), and among those ethnie that emerged as proto-nations in the medieval period were the Cornish." "The relationship between England and Cornwall, Anglia et Cornubia as medievaldocuments sometimes had it, was complex and has yet to be teased out fully. But everywhere there are hints and clues, and new perspectives drawn recently by a range of Cornish scholars intimate a unique relationship that was close but where Cornish distinctiveness was important, and where, paradoxically, behind the power-nexus of superior and subservient, coloniser and colonised, there was on occasions a sneaking English respect of (and indeed reliance upon) Cornish attributes. Of course this echoes the institution of the Duchy of Cornwall …which bound Cornwall tightly into the needs and imperatives of the English state and yet at precisely the same moment was a powerful mechanism of constitutional accommodation which allowed Cornwall a considerable degree of political autonomy. Cornwall was therefore bound closely tothe English state but in an important sense was not actually an integral part of it." CallingtonFox's response; Now this is where I do find some common ground with you but I suspect not in the way you would wish, we will see. It is clear, as I have said before, that Cornwall was considered as a much admired and special part of England but it was and is a part of England. Reading texts from times such as you quoted above is one of monarchs showing great respect to the people of Cornwall but does not show a giving up of the right of Kingship of Cornwall as a part of England. To be continued....

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 19 2012, 12:12AM

    Continued... KernowGB comment: I shall also include a quote from a section of the Mebyon Kernow submission to Kilbrandon Royal Commission on the Constitution, relating to its section on "The status of the Cornish in the Medieval and Tudor periods" published on pgs 19 –20 in the Report (1972): "In the submission of Bishop Kenstec to the See of Canterbury in about 870, when a king of Cornwall was still reigning, he describes himself as elected to the episcopal See 'in gente Cornubia', 'in the nation of Cornwall'. And when Eadulf, Bishop of Crediton, was given three manors in Cornwall in 909 it was 'ut … vistaret gentum Cornubiensem', 'that he might visit the Cornish nation'. In Ethelred's charter of 994, and often later, it is 'provincia Cornubiae'. The use of 'provincia' instead of 'gentes' [after the Athelstan settlement] … was a natural consequence of Cornwall's political incorporation in [the kingdom of] England, but in no way affected the popular status of the Cornish, whom the English Crown and people continued to regard as a nation in their own right. The early English kings went no further than to claim that they were: 'King of the Angles and of the other races in circuita'. "I shall also include a quote from a section of the Mebyon Kernow submission to Kilbrandon Royal Commission on the Constitution, relating to its section on "The status of the Cornish in the Medieval and Tudor periods" published on pgs 19 –20 in the Report (1972): "In the submission of Bishop Kenstec to the See of Canterbury in about 870, when a king of Cornwall was still reigning, he describes himself as elected to the episcopal See 'in gente Cornubia', 'in the nation of Cornwall'. And when Eadulf, Bishop of Crediton, was given three manors in Cornwall in 909 it was 'ut … vistaret gentum Cornubiensem', 'that he might visit the Cornish nation'. In Ethelred's charter of 994, and often later, it is 'provincia Cornubiae'. The use of 'provincia' instead of 'gentes' [after the Athelstan settlement] … was a natural consequence of Cornwall's political incorporation in [the kingdom of] England, but in no way affected the popular status of the Cornish, whom the English Crown and people continued to regard as a nation in their own right. The early English kings went no further than to claim that they were: 'King of the Angles and of the other races in circuita'. " CallingtonFox's response; I have read these things before and have seen, just as you will have, that these descriptions were marks of respect and not established as a matter of legal and actual fact. I refer you once again to Edward the 3rd who when creating the Duchy of Cornwall in 1237 did clearly so and with the support and blessing of his realms representatives, stated unequivocally that Cornwall was not only a county but a county of England. This is recorded fact and I proved it to you. •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:30PM Then we have the Norman Conquest which supersedes the Anglo-Saxon or, as the Cornish called them, the English. KernowGB Comment: Perhaps you could clarify the slightly ambiguous comment, "or, as the Cornish call them, the English? CallingtonFox's response; I said 'called' them. It was a referral to a name used by some for Anglo-Saxons. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 19 2012, 12:14AM

    Continued.. •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:30PM The same book introduces a Professor Markale who discerns a link between the Norman Conquest, the Breton presence, the renewed accommodation of Cornwall he said "In fact, it is agreed that about one third of William's army at Hastings was made up of Breton nobility and foot soldiers. Many of them received land in Devon and Cornwall…" KernowGB Comment: Can you please elaborate on the significance of the final sentence. Ignoring for a moment the observation and comment in your subsequent paragraphs? CallingtonFox's response; If you mean the sentence ending in '…the renewed accommodation of Cornwall…' It regarded rewarding those who helped William gain the throne of England. If you mean the one about 'Many of them received land in Devon and Cornwall…' I suggest it is self-explanatory. •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:30PM I now refer you back to an earlier time in history where we saw the founding of Britanny and the Bretons in France by settlers who came from Cornwall. In other words what we see is the Cornish coming back to Cornwall to help the Normans take control. KernowGB Comment: Can you put a relative timescale on this "earlier time in history", in order for us to be able to judge its validity as a genuine point for consideration, within 'your context' of usage? It is reckoned to be from the 5th Century onwards. A bond between the people in Cornwall was maintained with those who colonised that part of what we now know as a part of France. It is a matter of tribal movements it is how countries eventually form. •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:30PM So on that point alone if we are to accept the existence of a current Cornish genocide it is one of their own doing through support of a Norman rule of Britain. They did, and willingly so, take part in this conquest and by doing so accepted rule by a King who now controlled what can only be considered as Norman England. KernowGB Comment: This can only be intended as a joke. Yes? Can you explain why having Cornwall 'ruled' by a 'Norman' king of England is any different to having Cornwall 'ruled' by an 'English' king of England? CallingtonFox's response; No, it not a joke it is another way of showing the idea of 'Cornish genocide' to be false. How can you commit genocide against yourself? A 'Norman King of England' came to the throne because of the direct and substantial support of those who lived in Cornwall and their fellow settlers in Brittany. My point, surely you must get this by now, is that at the very least you can not deny that Cornwall was under, by choice, the rule of an English King, an England of which Cornwall was a part, by choice. KernowGB comment: Without going back over previous comment from yourself, I seem to remember other occasions, which you 'cautiously' (and rightly so) allege as being the true 'Cornish Genocide'. You have now switched from that to attempting to show that the Cornish are the architects of their own demise, because there were Bretons in the Norman-French army of 1066. CallingtonFox's response; I do not believe that 'Cornish genocide' exists. I do not believe it ever existed unless, maybe, if you view events of settlement in history using today's moral judgements. I posted and post what I did and do, to show the myth of genocide, at the same time using your own arguments regarding the nature of 'genocide' to show that if it did happen it has already done so and therefore can not be happening now unless self imposed and wanted by being a part of England through choice! To be continued..

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 19 2012, 12:33AM

    Continued... KernowGB comment: Let me bring together both the book's observation and the complete quote from Professor Markale (my highlighting to show missing context): "Professor Markale discerns a link between the Norman Conquest, the Breton presence, the renewed accommodation of Cornwall, and Arthur: 'In fact, it is agreed that about one third of William's army at Hastings was made up of Breton nobility and foot soldiers. Many of them received land in Devon and Cornwall, just retribution it seemed for Saxon oppression … and a means not only of recovering their estates but of tightening the links between Britain and the continent. It was during this time, when the Bretons dreamt of rebuilding the old Britain, that the Arthurian myth came into being, and came to be seen as a kind of religious history for a people that had never accepted their defeat.'" CallingtonFox's response; The wording you highlight is a clear and obvious unproven opinion of the person quoted. Hence the use of "it seemed". The period must be viewed for what it was. People settling and moving, settling and moving wars were fought alliances formed and changed. We can not alter it but we can not ignore the fact that is a foundation upon a foundation which itself would have been upon a foundation going back to the first appearance of humankind. I left out any reference to Arthur as his existence, or even where he lived, has never been established as fact. KernowGB comment: Far from proving that my argument and evidence is, in your words, "flawed and hypocritical", you make an opening statement that includes the comment, "I am now going to use his posts from the beginning of this thread and add my response to them. I have not quoted all his posts in order to avoid unnecessary repetition." I cannot see any clear or structured response to any of the points that I have made and which you have quoted, except the one on unambiguously defining an English person. You are simply expanding on your originally presented opinions regarding some perception of 'natural evolution' or as it had been described by someone backalong as 'demographic entropy'. In the real world, I would equate such thinking: why do you not just lie back and think of England! CallingtonFox's response; Perhaps you should reread all my posts with a non-biased eye? Others can see what I am talking about. I do not have any problem with you being correct, I want only truth, but so far you have shown me nothing to prove your position at all. As for your last remark; you have no idea of who I am or where I am from, where my ancestry lay or anything else. I suggest you just lie back and think again. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 19 2012, 12:35AM

    Continued... •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:33PM Now, regarding Cornwall as a county: First the creation of a County Council in the 19th century was a purely administrative one. Locally elected people serving their locality and should not be confused with the county as a district. KernowGB Comment: That is a very subjective observation, which does not address the matters of evidence that I present, which is relating to where that "administration" is constitutionally and legally situated. If it should not be confused, as you imply, then why is it? When people say 'the county' they mean the district and/or the administration depending on context of use, because Cornwall is territorially considered, incorrectly, to be de facto an administrative county of England. CallingtonFox's response; Cornwall is and was a County of England both as an area for ceremonial purposes etc, and for local administrative purposes, the two are different. •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:33PM Before I go forward to the Reign of Edward the 3rd I wish to add this; Regarding the Duchy, 'Cornwall a History' has this to say; "The Duchy grew out of the earlier Earldom of Cornwall which was itself a singular institution and appears to have been created as an accommodating successor to the earlier line of Cornish chieftain kings." KernowGB Comment: Since you offer no direct response, or observation, as to why you have quoted this item, I have no response to it, other than the fact that you have quoted it correctly. I recommend, however, that you read pages 78 – 80, of said book, where some flesh has been added to the bone. CallingtonFox's response; I added it for historical informational purposes. I read the book. •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:33PM Moving on to the reign of Edward the 3rd (r 1327-1377) he revived the languished Cornish earldom as a Duchy in March 1337. I transcribe below much of the charter which brought the Duchy into being. The full charter can be found in 'Carew's Survey of Cornwall' by Sir Richard Carew first published in 1602 and is taken from the Charter Roll of the 11th year of the reign of Edward 3rd No.53, preserved among the Records of the Court of Chancery. The grant to Edward, Duke of Cornwall and Earl of Chester, the Kings Son, of the Sheriffalty, and divers castles, manors &C. in Cornwall and Devon, reciting his creation to the Dukedom. The King to his Archbishops, &C, Greeting. Know ye, that whereas We being lately desirous to honour the person of our beloved and faithful Edward, Earl of Chester, our first begotten son, have, with the unanimous assent and advice of the Prelates, Earls, Barons, and others of our council, in our present Parliament assembled at Westminster on Monday next after the feast of St. Mathias the Apostle last past, given to our said Son the name and honor of Duke of Cornwall, and have created him Duke of Cornwall, and have girt him with a sword, as it is meet; and that he may be able to maintain the state and honour of a Duke, according to the dignity of his birth, and the more easily to support the expenses incumbent in that behalf, We have given and granted by our charter, for us and our heirs, to our said Son, under the name and honor of Duke of the said place, the sheriffalty of Cornwall, with the appurtenances, and the castle, borough, manor and honor of Launceston, with the park there and other appurtenances, in the counties of Cornwall and Devon; the castle and manor of Tremarton, with the town of Saltash, and the park there, and their other appurtenances , in the Counties aforesaid; the castle, borough, and manor of Tintagel, with the appurtenances, in the said County of Cornwall; the castle of Restormel, with the park there, and their appurtenances in the same county……………. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 19 2012, 12:37AM

    Continued... •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:35PM I have the full transcript but it continues in the same vain naming places and means of income all within the County of Cornwall. Later however it goes on to say the following; '…..except only 1000 marks, which we have granted for us and our heirs, to our beloved and faithful William de Montacute, Earl of Salisbury, to be received by him and the heirs made of his body lawfully begotten, from the issues and profits of the coinage aforesaid, under a certain form in our other charter to the same Duke, and to the first begotten sons of his and his heirs, Kings of England, and Dukes of the said place in the Kingdom of England, hereditarily to succeed: together with the Knights fees, advowsons of churches, abbies, priories, hospitals, chapels, and with the hundreds, fisheries, forests, chaces, parks, woods, warrens, fairs, markets, liberties, free customs, wards, reliefs, escheats and services of tenants, as well free as native, and all other things to the aforesaid castles, towns, manors, honor, stannary, coinage, lands, and tenements, howsoever and wheresoever belonging or appertaining; together with certain other manors, lands and tenements, in divers other counties of our Kingdom, of us and our heirs for ever, as in our said other charter is more fully contained. We, being willing to do more ample favour to the aforesaid Duke in his behalf, for the more abundant support of such honour, have granted for us and our heirs, Kings of England, Dukes of the said place in the Kingdom of England, hereditarily to succeed for ever…..' It then ends as follows; These being witness, the most venerable fathers, John, Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all England, our Chancellor; Henry, Bishop of Lincoln, our treasurer; Roger, Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry; Thomas, Earl of Norfolk and Marshal of England, and our most dear uncle; Richard, Earl of Arundell, and Thomas, Earl of Warwick; Thomas Wake de Lydell, John de Mowbray, John Darcy le Neven, steward of our household, and others. Given by our hand at Westminster, the eighteenth day of March. By the King Himself and the whole Council in full Parliament. The lawful King of the time who was there because of the help of a people originally from Cornwall and whose Parliament would have contained members from his entire Kingdom including Cornwall recognises Cornwall as a county of England despite the Dukedom. KernowGB Comment: Your inclusion of the above text, is just another example of your, now seemingly, subjective approach to this discussion. The full text of the charter(s) may be viewed on the Tyr-Gwyr- Gweryn website under the suite of pages listed as the Cornish Foreshore Case ( Crown Comment Duchy Charters). I would recommend that you: 1. read the 'omitted'opening comment (which I also quote below) and (My highlighting) 2. read the 'Duchy Comment' pages 3. read the 'TGG Comment' pages 4. read the "Cornish Genocide and the Truth?" thread 5. then, justify your final comment in your final paragraph. CallingtonFox's response; My comment is justified by historical, recorded facts. Administration however is always fraught with problems. It does not however change the facts. I see Scotland is a nation; I see Wales is a nation; I see Northern Ireland is a (new) nation. Cornwall helped form England and accepted their part of it. If Cornwall is or was ever considered to not be a part of England then clarity of this is not to be found. Why? To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 19 2012, 12:44AM

    Continued... KernowGB comment: Omitted opening comment to the Great Charter: "Regarding therefore, with anxious consideration, those things whereby our kingdom may be adorned, and the same kingdom, and the holy church thereof, and other the lands subjected to our dominion, may be more securely and fitly defended against the attempts of enemies and of adversaries, and our peace preserved inviolate amongst our subjects everywhere; and desiring that places of note of the same kingdom should be adorned with their pristine honors, and reflecting on, and having more intimate regard to, the person of our dear and faithful Edward Earl of Chester, our firstbegotten son,…" CallingtonFox's response; If this was omitted it was in error. Your highlighted words are in accord with earlier remarks made by myself. KernowGB comment; Let me also include a quote from a Commission by the First Duke of Cornwall, in 1351) which is contemporaneous to the previous quote, and relevant to illustrating, to you and others, your failure to comprehend the significance of what is contained in the Charter that you quote (my highlighting): EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL OF EDWARD THE BLACK PRINCE AT THE CHAPTER HOUSE. 25 Edw. III [Commission - Cornwall distinct from England] EDWARD, &c., to our dear servant, John Dabernoun, our Steward and Sheriff of Cornwall, greeting. On account of certain escheats we command you that you inquire by all the means in your power how much land and rents, goods and chattels, whom and in whom, and .of what value they are which those persons of Cornwall and England have, whose names we send in a schedule enclosed, and in case any of them are dead, to inquire also fully into whose hands their lands, tenements, goods, and chattels have fallen, and who occupy them at present, and of what value they now are, and certify to us thereof distinctly in each particular between this and three weeks of St. Michael next ensuing. …" Callington Fox's response; I am not going to repeat myself so I hope you will recall earlier comments of mine regarding the special place Cornwall has within England. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 19 2012, 12:47AM

    Continued... •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:46PM Cornwall has sent M.P's to the Westminster Parliament since its inception. Therefore and up to the present time have accepted and acquiesced in it being a part of England. KernowGB Comment: Why would it not send MPs to the Parliament of Anglia et Cornubia? Despite what you may have been told/taught/presumed. Parliament is an institution of the State (the kingdom) and not just for England. The State at that time would have comprised the nations of Cornwall, Wales and England. Any acquiescence has only existed since the formalisation of the 'county' administration in 1888/1889, which seems to coincide with a propaganda education system (1870), but more noticeably a general upsurge in Cornish awareness, Identity politics, and a fight for Cornish rights. I include two quotes taken from "The Making of Modern Cornwall", which is subtitled "Historical Experience and the Persistence of 'Difference'" by Philip Payton: Pg 92 - "The concept of "Cornish Nationality" did not die, however, [through the loss of the Cornish language] and (for example) in 1875 that very phrase was employed by the Moonta Mines Directors is South Australia (a prosaic and sober group of men not given to exaggeration or misrepresentation), while the sayings "Cornwall near England" and "into Cornwall, out of England" were in common use." Pg 93 – "The Cornish sense of identity, often held quite unselfconsciosly, was perhaps best captured and expressed in Hamilton Jenkin's delightful account of an incident in a nineteenth century dame-school. A pupil, asked to describe Cornwall's geographic and political status, declared that '… he's kidged to a furren country from the top hand.' This answer was '… heard by the whole school with much approval, including old Peggy (the school-dame herself'. The 'furren country' to which Cornwall was 'kidged' (joined) was, of course, England, the pupil's response indicative of a developed sense of identity – of the sort so noticeable to Collins, Henwood and other writers – which was wide in Cornwall" Parliament does not necessarily denote 'a nation', but always a state. You must also be aware of the hegemonically contrived synonymy of 'England/Britain' and 'English/British' both before, but even moreso after the Union of Crowns and Parliaments. It is only in the latter part of the 20th century that there have been any concern for the rights of minorities, especially national minorities. Therefore, what recourse did the Cornish have in getting their Rights respected and resolved by a corrupt State hierarchy? CallingtonFox's response; I am fully aware of the nature of Parliament and its relationship to the countries represented therein. But the parliament to which Cornwall sent M.P's at its inception was an English one; I guess the context was not clear. The rest of your post regarding Cornish rights and corrupt state hierarchy etc, etc I feel has already been addressed by myself. Please, show us definitive proof. If you can, I for one would back you up in asking for answers and redress. To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 19 2012, 12:49AM

    Continued... •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:46PM I suggest that what is being perceived as 'genocide' is no more than a natural progression of a people within a part of a larger nation towards self-caused and/or acquiesced changes. KernowGB Comment: You have previously made the same, or similar, assertion, which I have rejected, but I still contend that you have not yet come even close to proving it to be correct, or me to be incorrect. What, for example, do you identify by your use of the term "larger nation"? Whose nation? You are free to suggest, but you certainly have not proven, that it is a 'natural progression', simply because you have not even given consideration to the existence of power politics, the difference between right and wrong, or the modern discussion on genocide. Plus, I regret to say, that you seem not to be addressing any of my evidence that clearly proves the existence of Cornish Genocide, but only refer to my comments and conclusions that I derive from that evidence, by submitting your own opinions on the issues. CallingtonFox's response; I also reject your own assertions regarding 'genocide' and have given you evidence and proof as to why. My use of the words 'larger nation' are used to help illustrate the part played by one part of it within the whole. Natural progression is a fact. It happens all the time throughout the world, people change, cultures change, ideals change. Do you really deny that it has never or is still not occurring in Cornwall?! I know all about power politics thank you, and the difference between right and wrong and also the 'modern discussion on genocide'. I am not a stupid child with no idea of how the world works or the people within it. I care, I care about my loved ones, I care about others, I care. That is why I have been bothering to interact with you and others on this forum. Do I really need to repeat myself regarding proof of 'genocide'? To be continued...

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 19 2012, 12:57AM

    Continued and ended... •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Tuesday, October 09 2012, 4:46PM Finally I will deal with a Cornwall being separate from England whether as part of Great Britain or otherwise. What if Cornwall were to get the chance to become independent? I, and other, have asked questions of those who would support such a move. KernowGB will not answer these questions because he feels it not yet time to do so. If anyone who wishes to advocate or pursue an independent Cornwall they surely owe it to those who live here to explain what it would entail, in full. Such questions as 'who would have the right to live here and under what conditions? Before they pursue their cause. KernowGB Comment: This is, as I have mentioned before, an entirely irrelevant discussion, within the context of this thread, which is solely to expose a 'wrong' in an attempt to put it 'right'. If you are suggesting that it is relevant, then you are either arguing against yourself, by anticipating some long-term (not so) future event, or attempting to plant the proverbial elephant in the room, in order to focus the discussion away from the principle of resolving the wrong that is Cornish Genocide. It has also been shown that the only connection that Cornwall has to England, apart from a de facto one, is via 'the Crown' as ruler of the Kingdom. You have not yet proven otherwise. Neither, in my opinion have you addressed the specific items that you originally quoted with the comment, "I am now going to use his posts from the beginning of this thread and add my response to them." I genuinely appreciate the time and effort that you are putting into this topic, which truly makes a refreshing change from the mischievous 'one liners' from the off-stage hyenas scavenging off any tit bits that can be picked up to further their own personal agenda. However, I feel that you are avoiding commenting on the real issues and principles involved in this topic, by seeking, on the one hand, to excuse the existence of the process as being 'natural progression', whereas on the other hand, you are also attempting to show that the process is something that the Cornish have brought upon themselves. What is missing seems to be the crucially objective factor that asks the question: What if KernowGB is CORRECT? CallingtonFox's response; I started another thread in response to Cornwall becoming a separate nation. As for Cornwall being de facto connected to England I have given you unequivocal proof that is a part of England in fact. 'Genocide', once again I see no need to repeat myself. I was going to quote each of your posts but it would have been needless repetition I should have been clearer and reworded the beginning. I have addressed all items, it is you who have not done so and I am not the only one to see that, why? As for "What if KernowGB is CORRECT?" Trust me, if I thought you were I would tell you. I have and will continue to try and find proof of such. I am not afraid of truth only outcomes born of ignorance. Have you asked yourself the same question regarding me? Ended.

  • KernowGB  |  October 21 2012, 3:50PM

    by CallingtonFox - Thursday, October 18 2012, 11:30PM "Post in response to KernowGB's pdf: I am unable to convert my file to a pdf. so have had to respond this way. KernowGB's pdf. is linked in a recent post above. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Apologies for replying until now. I have not been around much for a few days. This is to thank you for your reply, which I shall give some consideration to over the next day or so, before responding. I have, however, added your above responses to my previous pdf file and will respond to them, when I have properly considered them and confirm when done.

  • KernowGB  |  October 25 2012, 4:00PM

    @CallingtonFox (re - Thursday, October 18 2012, 11:30PM) I can confirm that I have, at last, just posted my responses to your above comments in a pdf file, which may be accessed at http://tinyurl.com/9gbemmn I am sorry to note that we do not seem to be coming together on this, but the exchange is, I feel, invaluable.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 25 2012, 7:54PM

    KernowGB, I will read your responses and I will be replying to them. I do agree that it appears we are not 'coming together' more like going round in circles, but, yes, the exchange I think is invaluable.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 26 2012, 11:31PM

    KernowGB. Despite what you have posted you have not produced a 'smoking gun' of any form to prove your claim of a 'Cornish genocide.' My wife, who is some years younger than me, can recall being taught a lot of history pertaining to Cornwall while at school. Indeed the teaching of Cornish history and of Cornish customs etc has increased. How can that indicate 'Cornish genocide'? If this 'genocide' is state controlled please show us the Parliamentary and Crown records to prove it. The United Nations recognises the United Kingdom the United Kingdom is legally defined as the countries of Northern Ireland, Scotland and England with Wales. Taken from the official website of the British Monarchy. "The concept of a single ruler unifying different tribes based in England developed in the eighth and ninth centuries in figures such as Offa and Alfred the Great, who began to create centralised systems of government. Following the Norman Conquest, the machinery of government developed further, producing long-lived national institutions including Parliament. The Union Flag, or Union Jack, is the national flag of the United Kingdom. It is so called because it combines the crosses of the three countries united under one Sovereign - the kingdoms of England and Wales, of Scotland and of Ireland (although since 1921 only Northern Ireland has been part of the United Kingdom). The flag consists of three heraldic crosses. The cross of St George, patron saint of England since the 1270's, is a red cross on a white ground. After James I succeeded to the throne, it was combined with the cross of St. Andrew in 1606. The cross saltire of St Andrew, patron saint of Scotland, is a diagonal white cross on a blue ground. The cross saltire of St Patrick, patron saint of Ireland, is a diagonal red cross on a white ground. This was combined with the previous Union Flag of St George and St Andrew, after the Act of Union of Ireland with England (and Wales) and Scotland on 1 January 1801, to create the Union Flag that has been flown ever since. The Welsh dragon does not appear on the Union Flag. This is because when the first Union Flag was created in 1606, the Principality of Wales by that time was already united with England and was no longer a separate principality." And I will quote Taxman100 now; "Please let me know which legally accepted/recognised document states that Cornwall is a Nation State." To which I add: I showed you prove of Cornwall being a county of England as far back as 1237, show us when that was legally changed. At this point, as it is obvious we are just going round in circles, I wish some other members would join in, that is supposing they feel inclined to read everything we have posted. Maybe they could see what we are on about? One thing is for sure, this subject can not be done justice within the confines of a Forum thread.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 26 2012, 11:32PM

    KernowGB. Despite what you have posted you have not produced a 'smoking gun' of any form to prove your claim of a 'Cornish genocide.' My wife, who is some years younger than me, can recall being taught a lot of history pertaining to Cornwall while at school. Indeed the teaching of Cornish history and of Cornish customs etc has increased. How can that indicate 'Cornish genocide'? If this 'genocide' is state controlled please show us the Parliamentary and Crown records to prove it. The United Nations recognises the United Kingdom the United Kingdom is legally defined as the countries of Northern Ireland, Scotland and England with Wales. Taken from the official website of the British Monarchy. "The concept of a single ruler unifying different tribes based in England developed in the eighth and ninth centuries in figures such as Offa and Alfred the Great, who began to create centralised systems of government. Following the Norman Conquest, the machinery of government developed further, producing long-lived national institutions including Parliament. The Union Flag, or Union Jack, is the national flag of the United Kingdom. It is so called because it combines the crosses of the three countries united under one Sovereign - the kingdoms of England and Wales, of Scotland and of Ireland (although since 1921 only Northern Ireland has been part of the United Kingdom). The flag consists of three heraldic crosses. The cross of St George, patron saint of England since the 1270's, is a red cross on a white ground. After James I succeeded to the throne, it was combined with the cross of St. Andrew in 1606. The cross saltire of St Andrew, patron saint of Scotland, is a diagonal white cross on a blue ground. The cross saltire of St Patrick, patron saint of Ireland, is a diagonal red cross on a white ground. This was combined with the previous Union Flag of St George and St Andrew, after the Act of Union of Ireland with England (and Wales) and Scotland on 1 January 1801, to create the Union Flag that has been flown ever since. The Welsh dragon does not appear on the Union Flag. This is because when the first Union Flag was created in 1606, the Principality of Wales by that time was already united with England and was no longer a separate principality." And I will quote Taxman100 now; "Please let me know which legally accepted/recognised document states that Cornwall is a Nation State." To which I add: I showed you prove of Cornwall being a county of England as far back as 1237, show us when that was legally changed. At this point, as it is obvious we are just going round in circles, I wish some other members would join in, that is supposing they feel inclined to read everything we have posted. Maybe they could see what we are on about? One thing is for sure, this subject can not be done justice within the confines of a Forum thread.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 27 2012, 11:32PM

    Correction to the following, 1237 should read 1337; "To which I add: I showed you prove of Cornwall being a county of England as far back as 1237, show us when that was legally changed."

  • KernowGB  |  October 28 2012, 12:32AM

    @CallingtonFox (re Saturday, October 27 2012, 11:32PM) Thanks. I had already assumed that it was a typo. I can confirm that I have added your response and my comment to the pdf document and now uploaded the amended document, as before, to: http://tinyurl.com/9gbemmn

  • Truro_Kernow  |  October 28 2012, 12:38AM

    Where is the recognition for the Nations of Native North Americans? The aborigines of what is now Australia? The maoris of what is now New Zealand? The Basques? Our brothers, the Bretons? The Catalans? The Bavarians? The Kurds? The Tibetans? The Chechans? The Tamils? The Hmongs? The Flemish? The list is endless and includes us, the original Britons, the Cornish in our land of Cornwall. We are not English. Nor do we wish to be. The truth: http://tinyurl.com/9cwm7bg Kernow kensa. Kernow bys vyken!

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 28 2012, 1:21AM

    Links to somebodies site where they give their own opininions and cherry picked peices of of history, taken out of context, which makes it worse, does NOT prove Cornwall is not a part of England.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 28 2012, 1:22AM

    Thanks KernowGB, I will read it later.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 28 2012, 1:42AM

    Love my spelling of 'opinions' in the second from last post, sorry. KernowGB and Truro_Kernow, have you ever tried to prove yourselves wrong? I am serious, I promise.I do it to myself, works wonders for clarity of thought etc.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 29 2012, 4:45PM

    •ï€ Posted by CallingtonFox - Friday, October 26 2012, 11:31PM KernowGB. Despite what you have posted you have not produced a 'smoking gun' of any form to prove your claim of a 'Cornish genocide.' KernowGB Comment: Then why not respond by specifically discussing my rebuttals of your previous attempt to turn this into a discussion on 'conspiracy', or any other aspect of my submitted evidence and argument, instead of a summary dismissal? CallingtonFox's response: Because your 'evidence' is not only highly subjective as are your 'arguments' that all we are doing is going round and round in circles. I have also been researching extensively from sources that support your argument and I see no conclusions, only personal, subjective opinions and a great deal of historical 'evidence' taken out of the all important historical contexts in which they were formed, and much of it, was even then, clearly personal opinions. Saying something, does make it a fact. You have not been able to prove that Cornwall is not a part of England and I have proved to you that it is. I rejoice in the diversity of our country, I am truly proud of it, every county has a history, and every one has played its part, including Cornwall. You have not been able to prove the existence of 'Cornish genocide' you show us highly subjective personal opinions which appear to mainly blame the Crown and State, but you offer no prove. Evidence, not matter how good YOU think it is, does not equate to prove. I am trying to prove myself wrong because the truth is all that matters. You should try it too. Posted by CallingtonFox- Friday, October 26 2012, 11:31PM One thing is for sure, this subject can not be done justice within the confines of a Forum thread. KernowGB Comment: I could not have put that better myself CallingtonFox's response: Yay, we agree.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 29 2012, 4:48PM

    "For pities sake, please substitute 'proof' for 'prove' in the appropriate places'

  • KernowGB  |  October 29 2012, 9:32PM

    @CallingtonFox (re Monday, October 29 2012, 4:48PM) I have done appropriate substitutions and added your posting with my added comments to the pdf document, as before. -- http://tinyurl.com/9gbemmn

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 29 2012, 10:21PM

    By KernowGB: "If you genuinely wish to prove yourself wrong, then why not, just for the sheer hell of it, work on the hypothesis that KernowGB is correct and approach it from my (the Cornish) point of view and look for all the manifestations/clues that would have the effect of destroying the Cornish people, but without destroying the body." Are you in telesales? KGB, I have done and am continuing to, TRY and prove you correct. If you seriously think that I have not answered you and if you seriously think that you have answered me, then either you are just winding me up (fail) or you have become so blinded by your own ideas of being correct that you will never, ever see otherwise. I will say it once more, I have and am continuing to try and prove you right. Clearly you have not tried to prove yourself wrong. Please, try it!

  • KernowGB  |  October 30 2012, 10:00PM

    @CallingtonFox (re Monday, October 29 2012, 10:21PM) I have added your posting with my added comments to the pdf document, as before: -- http://tinyurl.com/9gbemmn --

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 30 2012, 10:17PM

    Hi KernowGB, I trust you are well. I have opened the pdf and can see no changes, a mistake I guess. One thing I have noted since I came to this thread is your desire to accept your part and that of where you live to be of and in Great Britain. Great Britain is legally defined as the Union of Scotland and England with Wales. Three countries not four, not five, but three, do you accept this?

  • KernowGB  |  October 31 2012, 11:18AM

    @CallingtonFox (re Tuesday, October 30 2012, 10:17PM) I am absolutely fine, thanks, and hope that you are also? I can assure you that the response is there, as before. I did check it at 22:10 hrs. Seeing the timing of your posting, I can only assume that you were there ready to pounce and beat the data transfer. As to the point, and question that you pose, in your post: If you have 'genuinely' understood anything about what it is that you are allegedly discussing (sic), then you must already know what my answer is to your question. As I have clearly shown, the Crown & State are culpable in the process of Cornish Genocide, then those that defend the status quo will need to venture outside of the protected zone of the status quo 'safety net' to prove themselves right and me wrong. So far that is, has been, and will be, a step too far for some, but it is yet another pointer in proving me right. -- http://tinyurl.com/9gbemmn -- STOP THE CORNISH GENOCIDE! NOW!

  • myghternda  |  October 31 2012, 12:28PM

    Living within the borders or jurisdiction of a STATE. States have come and gone throughout history but the NATIONState is a relatively new concept, combining identity and loyalty (feeling part of something) whereas previous states, kingdoms cared little for you and your identity and whether or not you feel part of something. The Cornish question is a consequence of the English question. England was a state but not a nationstate. It possessed many groups including the Welsh, Channel islanders even some French for a while. Nationalists didnt exist therefore didnt help CONSTRUCT an English identity. Modern England and the Kingdom Of England are not the same thing. When and if the English construct a nationstate then their is more an argument.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 31 2012, 12:29PM

    Yes I am fine too thank you. I see the response now, I apologise for somehow missing it. I think we are not getting very far now, sadly. It is obvious that neither feel the other has done justice to our positions. It is because of this that I wish others, from any side, I hope both, would come forward and give their views on what we have both posted. Will you answer my previous question though, regarding Great Britain being, legally, the union of Scotland and England (already including Wales) and no other countries? There is no genocide.

  • myghternda  |  October 31 2012, 1:07PM

    Correction: THERE not their and MORE OF an argument. I should proof read before I put it on the forum.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 31 2012, 1:11PM

    How about flipping things? My identity as an English man living in the county of Cornwall, which is a part of England is being challenged by some who wish to rewrite history, use historical writings and opinions out of context, fail to acknowledge historical extant facts, and attempt to take my country, my heritage and my culture from me. And without knowing who I am or where I come from, or anything of substance about me, call me an imperialist and by default of not agreeing with them, a supporter of genocide. Get this, I read your posts and I research your positions and your points of view using your sources and I do not agree with you. Not because I am a bloody imperialist or a genocide supporter, but because I see nothing but insurmountable flaws within your own writings and claims. Stop the English genocide, NOW!!

  • myghternda  |  October 31 2012, 1:13PM

    Yes GB is the union of the Kingdoms of England and Scotland. But the countries of England and Scotland are not states let alone nationstates so the concept of nationality is wishful on all sides (Cornish included). British nationality is less questionable as it is a legal contract.

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 31 2012, 3:51PM

    To be frank, I see nationalism as a very dangerous animal on the whole, that is why I would actually like to see less separatism, not more. We all have an inherent need to 'belong,' me no less than anyone else but how far do we want to push it? It is a dichotomy for sure.

  • KernowGB  |  October 31 2012, 5:06PM

    @CallingtonFox (re Wednesday, October 31 2012, 12:29PM & Wednesday, October 31 2012, 1:11PM) I shall respond to your postings later, in the usual way, but feel inclined at this point to query why you should expect an answer from me on anything, when you yourself seem unable, or unwilling, to do so when I have asked you to respond to me in a substantive way almost on every posting? +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ @myghternda (re Wednesday, October 31 2012, 12:28PM & Wednesday, October 31 2012, 1:13PM) Welcome indeed, myghternda. Your observations are certainly of interest and worth exploring further. However, in the meantime, could you please provide some clarification of your following comments. 1 - "The Cornish question is a consequence of the English question." 2 - "When and if the English construct a nationstate then there is more of an argument." 3 - "British nationality is less questionable as it is a legal contract." With regard to the third one: How would this fit into the recent Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe's (P.A.C.E.) discussion on introducing the term "cultural nations" (for national minorities), in order to address, what has been, imho, the Imperial States' hijacking of the term 'Nation'. I also feel that the idea of a "legal contract" does not a nation make. -- http://tinyurl.com/beb27ze -- and -- http://tinyurl.com/bhp8y5a --

  • CallingtonFox  |  October 31 2012, 7:44PM

    Hello KernowGB. If you do not feel I am bothering to answer you then you have not read, understood, or both, any of my responses and posts. You are not the only one who can read and interpret information regardless of sources and come to