Number 54 – They gave Karl Marx his first job

Whilst it is true that Karl Marx lived in London for 34 years he lived for many years in poverty and scraped together a living publishing articles in the New York Tribune, whilst I may not agree with Karl Marx's writings I feel (as did the British Government of the time) that he had a right to say what he thought, just as Mr Grasse has a right to publish his thoughts (however wrong they may be) because in British society we have a right to say, and publish, what we feel so long as it doesn't stir up racial hatred, it's a shame then that Mr Grasse has been allowed to publish this book as it succeeds in doing just that.

Number 53 – They invented the concentration camp

Whilst it is true that during the Boar War the British had concentration camps, it was not the first time they had been used. The term “concentration camp” actually comes from the Spanish word reconcentrados (reconcentration). And was first used to describe camps set up by the Spanish during the 10 Years War (1868-78), however to see the first example of this sort of camp we have to look towards – where else?- America! In the 1830's these camps were set up to detain Native Americans.


The following is an extract from the website http://www.issuesandalibis.org/ -

President Andrew Jackson finished what the Puritans had begun 200 years before. In 1830, Congress, urged on by "Old Hickory," passed the "Indian Removal Act" which gave the federal government the power to relocate any Native Americans in the east to territory that was west of the Mississippi River. Though the Native Americans were to be compensated, this was rarely done fairly and in some cases led to the further destruction of many of the already diminishing numbers of most of the eastern tribes.
The Cherokee Nation was allocated land in Georgia as a result of the 1791 treaty with the U.S. Government. In 1828, not only did whites desire that land for settlement purposes but also for newly discovered gold. Georgia tried to reclaim this land in 1830, but the Cherokee protested and took the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court decided in favor of the Cherokee, however, the President and Congress forced the Native Americans to give up their land and in 1838 called in federal troops in to "escort" approximately 15,000 Cherokee people to their new home in the "Indian Territory." On the way, approx. 6,000 of the Cherokee people died. This event, known to the Cherokee as "The Trail Where They Cried," is better known as the "Trail of Tears."

That's a reason to be proud then!

Number 52 – They gunned down tens of thousands of defenceless Africans

Lets count the inaccuracies in this one.


1- “On a desolate African plain in 1884” wrong 1898

2- “eight thousand British infantrymen” wrong twenty five to twenty seven thousand Egyptian and British soldiers

3- “carrying high-powered machine guns met a horde of Ottoman soldiers” wrong they did not “meet” them, they were attacked by them

4- “armed with nothing more than spears and a few old muskets” wrong they had old rifles and spears, it is not known how many rifles, but with an army numbering more than fifty thousand men you can be sure that they had more than a “few” rifles

5- “Winston Churchill even celebrated the Battle of Omdurman” wrong, in his book 'The River War: An Historical Account of the Reconquest of the Soudan' Churchill actually gives a surprisingly balanced, well thought out account of the war and criticizes the military leaders of the time.

Not bad really Mr Grasse, why let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Number 51 – They filled their museums with stolen treasures

This is a pointless argument as EVERY museum the world over has artefacts in it's vaults that do not necessarily belong to them. Mr Grasse uses as an example the Parthenon marbles, well how about the Hope Diamond on display in the Smithsonian? This diamond was stolen from France, recut from the French Blue diamond which itself was cut from the Tavernier Blue diamond and was used in the French crown jewels, why then is it in America?

Number 50 – They germinated jingoism

That's rich coming from an American! The word jingoism is indeed an English word but the Americans had their own word for the same thing “spread-eagleism” and were (and are) just as guilty of it as the English.


Just to be clear jingoism means “extreme patriotism, especially in the form of aggressive or warlike foreign policy” does that sound like any nation we know?

Number 49 – They invented the machine gun

Oh my lord, Mr Grasse is right, almost! We did indeed invent a gun that could fire an almost constant stream of bullets, just not when Mr Grasse claims, in actual fact it was invented by James Puckle in 1718 (that's 171 years before Mr Grasse states). The idea of such a gun was expanded on and improved by many others before Hiram Maxim invented the Maxim gun that Mr Grasse talks about, oh and one other point Hiram Maxim was born in America and did not take citizenship in Britain until 1899 (10 years after the invention of his gun) therefore the Maxim Gun was actually an American invention!

Number 48 – They supported the Confederacy

I'm afraid to say that on this point Mr Grasse is again wrong, the British did provided arms, materials and even ship building to the Confederacy, however, we also supplied the Union with the same.


The only thing we were guilty of is making money from America.

Number 47 – They invented the velvet rope

It feels like Mr Grasse is clutching at straws with this one, for instance he gives no evidence that the British invented queuing to get in somewhere, if he had done his research as I have he would have found out that queuing did indeed begin in the UK, but it was out of necessity, people queued to get on early forms of public transport and also, because of rationing, to get food. It was not, as Mr Grasse states to make the people outside feel like second class citizens.


I have a theory why Mr Grasse hates the “velvet rope” so much, maybe he is excluded from getting into all the places he wants too, if this is the case then I suggest he tries changing his attitude and maybe more people will warm to him, as one of his employees said,when asked in a video for his company what she thought of Mr Grasse “he's an ass”.

Number 46 – They love a good hanging

Mr Grasse starts this particular diatribe with the fact that “every society has a spectacle at it's centre” apparently in America this is the Super Bowl in France it is the Tour De France and in North Korea it is the Mass Games, well that is certainly true now, but how about 142 years ago (that is when the last public hanging in Britain happened)? Well I'd like to look into history if I may. 1868 in America the “spectacle” would have been, well what do you know, a public hanging! In fact America did not abolish public hangings until 1936 (that's 68 years after England). Take a look at this picture taken at the last public hanging in America,

 

it looks like a “spectacle” to me!

Number 45 – They're a beacon of prudery and snobbery

In this section Mr Grasse seems to think that the British are all prudes and snobbish bores, he believes this to be the case because Victorian values were all prudish, I'm afraid to burst your bubble here Mr Grasse but this is a common misconception, they weren't prudish at all in fact there were more people with “loose morals” then than there are now. The author states that “in a truly free society, respect is due to every man and woman” while I agree in principle to this, I have to say that I think that respect has to be earned, which is probably why I have so little respect for Mr Grasse.

Number 44 – They encouraged and subsidized the slave trade

It is unfortunate that the British participated in the slave trade, in fact it was plain wrong for them to do so, however please don't blame the British for the whole thing, the biggest perpetrators were the Portuguese, this fact doesn't mean that the Portuguese were to blame either, most of the western world had a hand in the spread of slaves from Africa to the Americas, and I can honestly say that we were wrong to do so.


All that being said the British stopped this heinous trade in 1807 and banned slavery in 1833, however it was not until 1865 that the US abolished slavery.

One point I would like to make is that at the start of his tirade Mr Grasse says “modern Britain likes to look down it's collective nose at America's history of slavery and segregation”, well I have to say that segregation is a very separate issue. Enforced segregation never happened in Britain, as we all know it unfortunately did happen in the US, and if the British look down their “collective noses” at you in the States then I have to say, good, you deserve it, you should rightly feel ashamed.

Number 43 – They invented slums

Let me just point out that ever since people have lived together in towns and cities slums have existed. The only claim that the English have over the rest of the world is that we invented the word slum in the nineteenth century, as for the “rivers of sewage” that coursed “down the middle of narrow alleyways”, yeah right, which country invented sewers? That's right the English, therefore we cleaned our streets of disease and filth long before anyone else.


Sorry but this whole section looks like Mr Grasse has seen Oliver too many times, let me just inform you Mr Grasse, in words of one syllable, so you might understand – it's not real, it's made up, it's a bit of fun.

Number 42 – They perfected and spread the tedium of factory life

One thing I'm beginning to find tedious is pointing out how wrong Mr Grasse is, because yet again he is incorrect. The first factory as we know it today was in fact opened in Venice in 1104 it was the Venice Arsenal and it was erected to build ships (at it's peak it built one ship a day and employed over 15000 people). That being said I will agree that Britain did build lots of factories in the 1700's (as did America) but if it weren't for these factories and the wonderful people that worked in them we would not have the technology we have today, you wouldn't be able to read this blog for instance as the world wide web would not have been created because computers would still be the size of a small house (if indeed they would exist at all).

Number 41 – They invented child labour

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong! Child labour has been around as long as there have been children, to say that the British invented it is fabrication. Children worked mainly in farming throughout the world until factories started springing up in the UK and USA, these factories were hard and dangerous to work in, and, unfortunately children were used, but in Britain laws were passed that banned child labour in 1870, just imagine how terrible it must have been in the US, laws banning child labour were not introduced until 1938! That's 68 years after the UK.

Number 40 – They worshipped the Romans

To say we were a “savage people” before the Romans invaded us is, I'm afraid to say, incorrect. We set up economic and cultural links with Continental Europe and traded in tin with the Greeks, the Carthaginians, and the Pheonicians. Hardly savage then.
To say we worshipped them is also incorrect, we had little choice but to have them in our country, they were, as Mr Grasse points out “a more advanced civilization”, I think it's fair to say that we worshipped them as much as the Native Americans worshipped the American invaders who stole their land, murdered their people, and raped their women.

Number 39 – Their archaeologists pander to and defraud the public

First of all I'd like to point out that archeologists is the US spelling, I have spelt the word the English way (or rather, the correct way) above.
The example given by Mr Grasse is that of the Piltdown Man, and I have to say, he is correct in stating that the Piltdown Man is a fraud, however it did not just fool British archaeologists, it fooled people the world over for 40 years.
All that being said Mr Grasse is wrong on a couple of counts firstly the jawbone was from an orang-utan not a chimpanzee, the teeth were from a chimpanzee.
The reason it fooled people the world over is because it was remarkably well done, it proved the theory of the time, that we developed the large modern brain before the modern omnivorous diet.
Can anyone name any other hoaxes that have fooled people for years, but then turn out to be hoaxes? How about the famous video of the Bigfoot taken by Roger Patterson? Or maybe the the Cardiff Giant, which American people flocked to see in their thousands until it was discovered that the Giant was no more than a crude modern statue that had been buried to make it look old (this happened in 1869, 43 years before the Piltdown Man).

Number 38 – They never got over the war of 1812

What Mr Grasse fails to point out is what the war of 1812 was actually about, it was caused because America, at the time, was trading with Napoleonic France, and murdering thousands of Native Americans just so they could get a foothold in the potentially valuable farmlands of the Northwest, because the British didn't agree with this behaviour we tried to stop it, causing the Americans to declare war.
The national anthem “The Star-Spangled banner” was actually a poem written about the attack on Baltimore, when Francis Scott Key saw the American flag waving above Fort McHenry. It was set to the music from an old English drinking song called “The Anacreonic Song”. The fact that this song was made the American national anthem in 1931 shows that it is the Americans who never quite got over the war of 1812, and not the British, who seem know very little about this period in their history.

Number 37 – They polluted sincere, freethinking discourse with sarcasm, irony, and other forms of pernicious wit

So we “polluted sincere, freethinking discourse”, this is blatantly not true, I know lots of Americans who are just as witty as the British, because they understand sarcasm and irony. Most American comedians use this form of wit to shut up drunk and unfunny hecklers. Obviously only intelligent people will understand the complexities of this particular form of wit, I'm sorry to inform the readers of this blog Mr. Grasse is not as intelligent or witty as he likes to think, maybe he is one of the drunk, unfunny hecklers that frequently get put down by comedians the word over.

Number 36 – They befouled the world's stages with incomprehensible dramas

Shakespeare is, according to Mr Grasse “way overrated”, if that were so then people would not queue up to see the latest adaptations, whether they be on film or on stage.
Apparently , according to Mr Grasse “good stories should be like a gangster movie: accessible, excessively violent, and easy to understand”. I suggest you take a look at “O” the 2001 movie by Tim Blake Nelson, or Al Pacino's 1996 “Looking For Richard”, or even “Prospero's Books” Peter Greenaway's 1991 movie, all of which contain violence and nudity, and are easy to understand (Even for Mr Grasse's limited intellect), they are, surprisingly, all adaptations of Shakespeare plays.

Number 35 – They couldn't stand up to Napoleon

Four words - Battle Of The Nile – Napoleon was defeated by the British.
Three words – Battle of Trafalgar – Napoleon again defeated by the British, causing him to give up plans to invade Britain.
Another three words – Battle Of Waterloo – Napoleon defeated for a third time by the British. In fact, Napoleon never defeated the British, ever.

Number 34 – They invented the gibbet

Where does Mr Grasse get his information? Wikipedia? You really should try and do a bit more research Mr Grasse.
The gibbet – as you quite rightly state – was used AFTER the criminal was dead, as a warning to others who might have wanted to commit similar crimes, so what is so sacred about a murderers body once he has been executed? Why should they have been allowed to enjoy a Christian burial?
One other point I feel I should make is that there is a variation called a gibbet iron, which is on display at Atwater Kent museum in, where else? Philadelphia US.

Number 33 – They give awards to cover their tracks

Historians can't quite understand Cecil Rhodes, on the one hand his ideas were racist (he virtually pioneered Apartheid) but on the other hand he had an unusual (for the time) interest in African cultures and language and seems to have had a respect for the African people that was very unusual.
All that being said, the Rhodes Scholarships continue to bring the most outstanding students from many countries to study at Oxford, and I doubt that any of these students would agree with most of Mr Grasses comments, they are, after all, very well educated.

Number 32 – They propagated their convoluted system of measurement around the globe

It's true that Britain invented a very confusing system of weights and measures, however as Mr Grasse points out, we switched to metric in 1965. The main gripe Mr Grasse seems to have is that America has not yet switched, do something about it then, stop twittering on about how backward our country is when, quite obviously, we accept change a lot easier than our friends in the States.

Number 31 – They believe in Government through fear

Mr Grasse says that Thomas Hobbes most famous work, Leviathan, “our principal emotion is fear, and government is created not as the sum of our freedoms and aspirations be a giant King Kong stomping all over the country.” What Hobbes actually said was that life without political authority would be “nasty, brutish, and short” and that we needed a government elected by the people it was governing to make and uphold laws otherwise we would revert back to nature and basically fight for everything we wanted, without Hobbes, the western world (including America) would not be run the way it is now, we would be living in fear everyday as food, clothes, and any other possessions we had could be taken from us by anyone using whatever force they wanted.
Just to add, had it not been for Hobbes and his “every man is equal” philosophy then we would probably still allow slavery (abolished 1833 UK 1863 USA).

Number 30 – They tried to take over Antarctica

Again, wrong. In the early decades of the 20th century 7 nations announced territorial claims for Antarctica, they were, Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, Great Britain, New Zealand, and Norway.
In 1959, the Antarctic Treaty was signed, that meant that no-one owned the Antarctic and it was for scientific purposes only.
Mr Grasse goes on to claim that Britain is to blame for global warming, well, just remind me who invented CFCs? That's right it was an American by the name of Thomas Midgley Jr. Not one to be beaten Mr Midgley then went on to invent leaded petrol! As one historian put it “he had more impact on the atmosphere than any other single organism in Earth's history.” 'nuff said.

Number 29 – They take credit for everything

Well that's rich, reading through this book it's quite clear Mr Grasse thinks that the US should take credit for everything good and let us British take the blame for everything bad.
The ONE example he comes up with is the Magna Carta, he is completely wrong about this document, he states that “all the Magna Carta says is that King John's power is not infinite.” well that's good enough for me, basically that means that the monarch is a figure head for the whole population, not the all powerful ruler they once were, that's called progress Mr Grasse, unlike our friends in the States we move forward, take a closer look at the Constitution, it states that you have the “right to keep and bear arms”, this was first used in the English Bill Of Rights 1689, and has subsequently been abolished in the UK (thankfully). The US can't seem to realise that the wording of the second amendment is very obscure and (probably) meant that the Militia (army) should be well armed to defend against attack from other countries, not that every man should have the right to keep a gun and use it for self defence.

Number 28 - They're run by the House of Lords (aka the axis of weevils)

Once again Mr Grasse shows his ignorance. Britain is not “run” by the House of Lords, it is run by the House of Commons (all of whom have been elected by the British people). The House of Lords debates legislation, and has some power to amend or reject bills. However, the power of the Lords to reject a bill passed by the House of Commons is severely restricted by the Parliament Acts.

Number 27 – British men are a little limp in the wrist, if you get my meaning

I wasn't going to dignify this one with a comment, but I thought better of it, so, here goes.
Mr Grasse says that he believes that men in the upper classes of Britain are a bit “fey” and that this is because of spankings they got from their teachers at school. Since 1987 corporal punishment has been outlawed in the whole of the UK, however it is still legal in 20 US states.
Also whilst at school they had “furtive cloakroom gropings” according to Mr Grasse, where is your evidence? I know that some children “experiment” whilst growing up, maybe the British are the only ones secure enough to admit it.
The last point Mr Grasse makes is that the Romans realised the need to allow homosexuality within their army, which made for a happier bunch of soldiers, this is certainly the case, and in Britain we allow homosexuals to join the forces, does the USA? At present I'm sad to say no.

Number 26 – They think terrorists are heroes

This is, I think one of the sickest, most hurtful things that Mr Grasse says in the whole book, how dare he say such a thing, he is a very, very disturbed “man”.
He states that on bonfire night that “the whole country sings and dances around a bonfire”, no we don't, we do however have fireworks and a bonfire, on top of which an effigy of Guy Fawkes is burned, so some 405 years after Mr Fawkes attempted to blow up the House of Commons he is still paying for his crimes, to emphasise this we have a nursery rhyme that goes “Remember remember the fifth of November, Gunpowder, treason and plot. I see no reason why the gunpowder treason, Should ever be forgot”.
Mr Grasse also states that this day is a national holiday, wrong again, it isn't, simple as that.
The last point Mr Grasse comes up with is that “such displays are in poor taste, and you won't be seeing them stateside on September 11th 2101 or 2501.” I doubt that you will see them in Hiroshima on August 6th 2145 or 2545 either.

Number 25 – They created the first very stupid and very violent puppet show for children

Wrong! The Punch and Judy puppet show can trace it's roots back to 16th century Italy, and was extremely popular in France.

It was (and still is) basically a story showing the fight between good and evil – Punch although a funny character always got his comeuppance in the end – it taught children that if they led their lives without violence and greed then they would have happier lives.
The stick that Punch used to hit Judy with was not a walking stick as Mr Grasse states, it was in actual fact a “slap-stick” which was a device that, although it caused a loud crack, used very little force to the person being struck (it is of course where we get the word slapstick).

Number 24 – They make good men into butlers, and butlers into slaves

It was all going so well, I thought this book might be getting more accurate with the previous chapter, but then, Mr Grasse goes and ruins it again.
Butlers were – and indeed are – thought of very highly, both by the people the serve and by the people who serve under them (basically they are managers of a household). They are well paid for the work they do and are much loved.
To give the example of Paul Burrell at the end of this chapter is foolish, as any British person knows he is scum, he has besmirched the good name of the Royals with his lies. He was called to the inquest into the death of Princess Diana and, in his words "told the truth as far as I could – but I didn't tell the whole truth. Perjury is not a nice thing to have to contemplate. I was very naughty.", this caused the coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, to warn the jury by saying "You have heard him in the witness box and, even without what he said subsequently in the hotel room in New York, it was blindingly obvious that the evidence that he gave in this court was not the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."

Number 23 – They hooked the Chinese on opium

I'm not going to argue with this one, Mr Grasse is correct (23 chapters in and he's got one right!), one point he doesn't say is that because of this the Chinese felt humiliated, which caused the Taiping and Boxer Rebellions and ended Dynastic rule in China.

Number 22 – They make time for tea

The whole basis of this argument is that the British take up to an hour for a tea-break, again, I'm happy to say that this is not the case. As a nation we take less breaks that the rest of Europe, and also work longer hours than the Americans (UK=44.4 hours USA=40 hours). Just to clarify, we have lunch-breaks not tea-breaks. Also Mr Grasse to say that because of this “ritual” (I think you'll find it's the Japanese who have a tea ritual) we wouldn't be carrying an extra fifteen pounds around our waistline is stupid, after all, which nation is the fattest? That's right, the USA wins again.
Just a couple more points you ignoramus, scones do not get dipped into tea as they are cakes, and cookies is an American word, the proper word is biscuit. Fool.

Number 21 – They conceal their caveman past with false histories

I have two problems with the statement above, firstly “caveman”, cavemen did not exist anywhere, let alone Britain. I presume Mr Grasse means Neanderthol or Cro-Magnon and the latest they existed (in the UK) is about 30,000 years ago, so, wrong again Mr Grasse. Secondly “false histories”, the British were known for making up stories, in much the same way every culture has, these are stories not histories.
The last point in this chapter is that the Chinese were building “a wall so big you can see it from the moon”, really? Ask Neil Armstrong if he saw it, no he didn't as you can't see it from the moon, there are only two man-made things you can see from the moon and they are The Netherlands and Fresh Kills (the rubbish dump on Staten Island, New York).

Number 20 - They believe in dragons, sea monsters and other creatures

Mr Grasse states that the British believe in a large and imaginary fish called a Leviathan, rubbish, the Leviathan was mentioned in both the Bible (Old Testament) and in the Hebrew Bible, but the name came to mean nothing more than a large whale, and there are plenty of them about.
The “fact” that the British put fanciful monsters on their maps is – as far as I can find out – not true I can't find any British maps with these monsters. I can, however find plenty of Icelandic examples, but no British ones. I'd love to be proved wrong on this, if anyone has any please let me know.
In the last paragraph Mr Grasse says that while we were worried to go too far into the unknown the Spanish and Portuguese explorers blazed across the seas. It's true to say that the Spanish and Portuguese did discover many new lands, but when they got there what did they do? Wiped out most of the indigenous cultures that's what.
While I'm on the subject of mapmakers, it is often quoted that America got it's name from an Italian mapmaker called Amerigo Vespucci. This is most probably not the case, it was actually the Welshman Richard Amerike. The reason it doesn't seem plausible that it was named after Amerigo Vespucci is that it if people had places named after them, it would be their surname, rather than their forename that was used.
After doing more research on this topic I have come across a story about a passenger ship called the Mauretania, in 1934 a series of articles appeared in the highly respected newspaper The New York Times stating that the crew of the Mauretania had numerous sightings of sea serpents, this, of course, was a lie perpetrated by both The New York Times and the reporter T. Walter Williams, but, it seems that most of the people in the USA who read the reports believed them. So just remind me Mr Grasse, which nation believe in fictitious sea serpents?

Number 19 - They spread the plague with their bad hygiene

There are so many inaccuracies in this section I barely know where to start.

Firstly the “Black Death” most probably began in Central Asia (where it still exists to this day)

Secondly the plague was caused by a the bobac variety of mormot, which passed it onto the fleas of the brown rat.

Thirdly between 75 and 100 million people died because of the plague not 35 million as stated by Mr Grasse.

Fourthly hygiene cannot, did not and will not spread the plague, if it did why did so many people die in areas where there were (comparatively) few rats, this was because the fleas travelled in cloth that was transported to these areas.

Lastly “lathering up with soap and water” as Mr Grasse condescendingly puts it would not stop the disease, the only way people can survive the plague (or more correctly the bubonic plague) is by targeting the infection with antibiotics (aminoglycosides streptomycin and gentamicin, the tetracyclines and doxycycline and the fluoroquinolone ciprofloxacin) and as antibiotics weren't available until at the 1890's, that's 540 years too late for the poor unfortunate people that died.

Number 18 - They dawdle the hours away with cricket, among other foolish games

Don't make me laugh Mr Grasse, the "foolish games" you list are card games like bridge and whist, backgammon, darts and other "pub games", what about poker? Is that a foolish game as well?
As for cricket, without it you wouldn't have baseball, which, by the way was an English invention (it was first mentioned in an English book from 1744 called "A little pretty pocket-book".

Number 17 - They enslaved the globe to get their tea fix

It's true that the British East India Company made a lot of money from tea but also from cotton, silk, indigo dye, saltpetre, and opium. It's also true that they were responsible for some horrific acts, however lets not forget what America's favourite drink was before the British put tax on it, that's right, tea, the only reason coffee is as popular today in America is because tea was so expensive.

To say that we "enslaved the globe" is a rather large exaggeration, but the British East India Tea Company, as I said earlier, did indeed do some terrible things, almost as bad as the white folks of America did when it came to cotton, almost a hundred years after us with the tea industry, you really should have learnt from our mistakes America.

Number 16 - They demean "primitive" culture in the Americas

For this part of the book after the heading I could see no evidence that the British actually do demean "primative" culture, all Mr Grasse says is that as a stoneage people we were not as sophisticated as some other cultures across the globe, this is true, we weren't, but to say that Stonehenge or the Cerne Abbas giant were "shamefully useless projects" is complete rubbish, and to claim that it was only the British that did such things is a also a lie. There are over a thousand examples of stone circles In Western Europe (including the British Isles) and some as far afield as Hong Kong.

The date Mr Grasse gives at the start of this particular diatribe (200 BC) is also incorrect as nobody knows exactly when these structures were built however there are no examples dating after 1500 BC, so, I'm sorry Mr Grasse but you are at least 1300 years out. Do your research, I have.

Number 15 - They tried to measure and control the universe through science

This section is ignorant and arrogant to the extreme, firstly an apple did not fall on Newtons head, he observed an apple falling and this gave him the idea for his law of gravity which is still correct to this day.

Newton created the worlds first practical reflecting telescope and discovered that white light is in fact composed of all the colours of the spectrum.

Micheal H. Hart (a Jewish American astrophysicist) wrote a book listing the top 100 most influential persons in history. Newton came second behind Muhammad and in front of Jesus, Buddah and Confucious.

Newton was, and indeed still is one of the greatest scientists ever, just ask any scientist.

Number 14 - They took the Christ out of Christianity

Catherine of Aragon, Henry VIII's first wife was not sterile, in fact she gave birth to at least 5 children (only one survived into adulthood) and was pregnant many more times than that, she and Henry were married for 20 years before Henry applied to the Pope to have the marriage annulled. He was originally granted the annulment by the Archbishop of Canterbury (the Pope's representative in Britain) on the grounds that Catherine was originally Henry's sister-in-law,and therefore the marriage was illegal, the Pope however refused, but this was more likely because he was scared of Catherine's nephew (the holy Roman Emperor Charles V), but by that time it was too late and Henry had married Anne Boleyn, so rather than face a long legal battle he probably would not win he decided to separate Britain from the Roman Catholic Church and created the Church of England.
Anne Boleyn was not "bulldog-faced" at all, in fact by all accounts she was a very attractive and well educated woman (perhaps too attractive as this is what led to her demise).
As for the fact that the Anglican Church (really called the Church of England) is still around 500 years later, this is true, but, where did Mormonism start? Or for that matter Jehovah's Witnesses? That's right once again, America!

Number 13 - They support piracy

Mr Grasse starts this section by saying "well not piracy exactly" so in other words the British don't support piracy! Make your mind up Mr Grasse.

In actual fact the basis of this argument is that Queen Elizabeth (the first - just to let you know Mr Grasse, as you left that bit of information out) issued a "letter of marque" to certain sailors, let me just say that this is completely true, it did happen (but then so did just about every other seafaring country in the world).

A letter of marque is now illegal in all but one country, can you guess which one? That's right America, as it is written into the Constitution.

Number 12 - They burned Joan of Arc at the stake

This again is true, in fact Mr Grasse is spot on "we" did, nowadays the trial wouldn't have gone to court, as there was no evidence against Joan, even the clerical notary Nicolas Bailly, who was commissioned to collect testimony against Joan, could not find any. It is right and fitting that she had a retrial (after her unfortunate execution) and found to be innocent of all charges. The execution even upset the executioner, Geoffroy Therage, who later stated that he "...greatly feared to be damned".

One point I have to make though, if Mr Grasse had done his research properly he would have known that the "arrow" (actually a crossbow bolt) she was stuck by, was in the leg (not the shoulder) and that this happened in 1429 (not 1428).

*EDIT* Having done some more research into this I have found that it was the French, not the English that executed Joan of Arc, and, I hate to tell you this Mr Grasse but it was not for heresy as you claim, but for cross-dressing. It turns out that the French captured her, then, sold her to the English for a ransom, but the English persuaded a French ecclesiastical court to bring charges of heresy against her.


After eight terrible months in which she was brutally beaten and raped by her captors she was brought before the French judge Pierre Cauchon who found that the most serious charge against her was cross-dressing as it was an “abomination unto the Lord” (Deuteronomy 22:5).

It was right that she was given a retrial, and that she was found innocent of all charges but, for the sake of correctness Mr Grasse, please do more research before you go to print otherwise you may well sound like a racist bigot.

Number 11 - They rewrote the Bible

I agree with this point, King James I did indeed have the Bible rewritten to make it more readable for the time, but then looking into the history of the Bible you can find numerous rewritings dating back to Moses in the early 1400's BC.
The Bible is still being rewritten today so that present day people can understand it's teachings, but one point I have to make, if you are a Mormon, Jehovah's Witness or a Christian (or indeed any denomination thereof) then you should know that the bible was originally a Jewish text, therefore surely the Jewish faith is the one true faith?
Just to add to this I, myself am an atheist so to me the Bible is not a great read.

Number 10 - Their Country Has Too Many Flags And Too Many Names

Apparently Britain has too many names just because we are made up from 4 different countries, similarly America is made up from 50 different states and 4 commonwealths and is known by 6 different names (The United States Of America, United States, the U.S., the USA, the States, or America).


Also each British country has it's own parliament, ministerial authority, and flag. Similarly each state in America has it's own government , police force and indeed flag, so that's 4 flags for us and 50 flags for the U.S. Oh, and the reason Wales was left off the Union Flag is because it was a principality and not a kingdom, however there have been talks to create a new flag that includes Wales.

And just one other point Mr Grasse the national flag for Britain is the Union Flag, not the Union Jack as you call it, it is only called the Union Jack when it is flown from the bowsprit of a ship.

Number 9 - They think Kings and Queens are better than the rest of us

From this section Mr Grasse shows how stupid he actually is, he seems to think that because it is written into the Constitution that "all men are created equal" that in America everyone is equal, not true, just take a look around you, are you equal to the President? If so why do you pay the President $103450000 every year (Salary: $400,000/yearly, Secret Service Protection: Undisclosed, but upwards of $100,000,000/yearly for the incumbent president, $3,000,000 yearly for the rest of their lives for each former president and his wife, Expense Account: $50,000/yearly)? That works out to be almost twice the amount we pay for the Queen, who, it has been calculated, actually brings into the country 20 times what she earns thanks to tourism. Now that's what I call value for money.

Number 8 - They hate freedom

If this section is to be believed then we, as British people, love the idea of laws, well we do, that is correct, but then who wouldn't? If it weren't for laws then everyone would be able to carry a gun and shoot people who have wronged them in some way - oh no wait, that's America isn't it?


Apparently we dish out ASBO's (anti social behaviour orders) to anyone who we think deserves them, as we can't tolerate the idea that they are free to do whatever they want, well let me ask you a question Mr Grasse, would you put up with seeing an elderly couple being abused by a group of teenagers day in and day out because they are "free" to do whatever they want? No, thought not.

Number 7 - They cut off the head of William "Braveheart" Wallace

At this point in the "book" I have to admit I was doubled up with laughter, Mr Grasse claims that the Hollywood movie Braveheart shows an accurate portrayal of the life of Sir William Wallace, it is in fact complete fiction, it's based on a poem by a 15th century minstrel called Blind Harry "The Acts and Deeds of Sir William Wallace, Knight of Elderslie" which has been rejected by historians as hogwash.
It's true that William Wallace was executed in the most barbaric and shameful way but then, just remind me how, a lot of the indigenous peoples of the Americas died?

Number 6 - They relish collecting taxes

The basis for this argument seems to be that when William the Conqueror assumed the throne of England in 1066 he set about collecting taxes. Well for a start William the Conqueror was French and was known as William the Bastard in England, so this surely means that the French relish collecting taxes and not the British?

Apparently because of this we pay taxes now, but it was the Egyptians who first came up with the idea of taxes, and anyway, the first taxes paid in England were during the occupation of the Roman Empire some 10 centuries before William the Conqueror was even a twinkle in his mother's eye.

Number 5 - They adopted a Roman as their Saint and blamed past misdeeds on a giant lizard

It is true that England has Saint George as its patron Saint (Scotland has Saint Andrew, Wales has Saint David and Ireland has Saint Patrick), but then so do plenty of other places including Aragon, Catalonia, England, Ethiopia, Georgia, Greece, Lithuania, Palestine, Portugal and Russia, as well as the cities of Amersfoort, Beirut, Fakiha, Bteghrine, Cáceres, Ferrara, Freiburg, Ljubljana, Pomorie, Preston, Qormi, Rio de Janeiro, Lod, Barcelona, Moscow, Tamworth and the Maltese island of Gozo, so are all these places the same as England?

So does America have a patron Saint? Well, no, not really, this is because the entire country has never had an official religion, although some states did originally have one. The Catholic church has never been prominent enough in American history to give the entire country a patron saint. Protestants don't give as much importance to saints as Catholics, so the religious community would not be unified on the idea. Or in other words America has too many separate religions to be unified in the idea of a patron Saint. It has been suggested in a few places that the Virgin Mary is the patron Saint of America, if this is the case then that means a woman who told everyone she never had sex yet strangely became pregnant with and indeed gave birth to Jesus, how's that for a fairy tale?

Number 4 - They tried to drag Christ to London

I don't really know where to start with this one, apparently because of the lyrics of a song that is occasionally sung at a few football (not soccer - that is a nickname for the game of football and comes from the original name "association football") matches, this is proof that the British have assumed that Jesus came to Britain, well, Mr Grasse is correct, there is no proof that Jesus came anywhere near the British Isles, but then there is no proof Jesus even existed.

Number 3 - They more or less castrated Scotland

In this section Mr Grasse tries to say that England beat all the other nations of the British Isles into submission, and that Scotland (and indeed Ireland) were the saviours of England in the first world war. It's true that there were many Scottish and Irish conscripts in the British Army but then there would be wouldn't there? It is after all the British Army - not the English Army.

As a postscript I would like to add that Scotland got it's own Parliament back in 1997, it's biggest achievement to date? The release of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi in 2009.

Number 2 - They are secretly pagan

Firstly lets take a look at the word "Pagan", well it comes from the Latin word paganus, meaning country dweller or rustic and is used to describe any localised religion before Christianization,it includes most of the Eastern religions, and the indigenous traditions of the Americas, Central Asia, Australia and Africa, I hope that clears it up.

Mr Grasse claims that long after the Middle East was "basking in the glow" of sane monotheism we, as a nation were still performing pagan ceremonies, well I hate to burst your bubble Mr Grasse but we still are - and so are you, or rather anyone that is Christian and celebrates Christmas or indeed Easter are, as Christmas was originally taken from ancient Babylon, the feast of the Son of Isis (Goddess of Nature) was celebrated on December 25. Raucous partying, gluttonous eating and drinking, and gift-giving were traditions of this feast. Also Easter, even the name "Easter" is taken from a pagan goddess called Eastre (or Eostre) who was the goddess of the spring.

I have to agree that as a nation we did practise human sacrifices, but so did almost every major religion that is around today, in fact you could argue that all forms of capital punishment are a secularised variant of human sacrifice, but thankfully Britain outlawed capital punishment back in 1969 (1973 in Ireland) although for certain offences you could still be hanged - until the law changed in 1998 that is. So which country still sacrifices humans to this day? Come on lets all say it together

1,

2,

3,

AMERICA!

Number 1 - They think they own the "English" language

In the first attack by Mr Grasse he claims that we, as a nation never use one word when two or three will do, he then goes on to outline three examples, these are:-
"Way Out" for "Exit"
"Water Closet" for "Bathroom" and
"Kill Your Speed" for "55".
Firstly "Way Out" means just that, if seen on a sign it means that this is the way out, however, "Exit" was originally a stage direction, meaning that someone was to leave the stage, therefore it is grammatically incorrect to use it in the meaning that "this is the way out".
Secondly "Water Closet" is not used in Britain any more, in fact it hasn't been used for well over fifty years (about the same amount of time that "Powder Room" ceased to be used in America) and even then it was shortened to "W.C.". In fact "Water Closet" means a toilet whereas "Bathroom" means a room with a bath, the correct (and most used) word is "Toilet" which is two letters shorter than "Bathroom" therefore it is more shortened than the American version.
The third - "Kill Your Speed" is actually an advertising campaign to try and stop people speeding in built up areas where there could be children, the full slogan is "Kill Your Speed Not A Child" when it comes to signs for speed limits we have "30" which applies to most built up areas "60" which applies to single carriageways and "70" which applies to dual carriageways and motorways (more information can be found here)

Mr Grasse then goes on to say that the roots of the English language comes from Germany and Mesopotamia, on this point he is almost correct, but then you can trace any language back to other countries and cultures, in fact if you look at the origins of the word colour (or color in America) it comes from old Latin via French, the fact that in England the spelling has changed since we first colonised America (color is the old English way of spelling it) shows that as a nation we have evolved, what does that say about America?

Lastly Mr Grasse states that the word genocide did not come into common usage until after the second world war, and that somehow it's because of some hatred of Germany that we now use it, which is - surprise surprise - incorrect, the word actually comes from Polish-born U.S. jurist Raphael Lemkin in his work "Axis Rule in Occupied Europe" from 1944. It was used in reference to Nazi extermination of Jews and literally means "killing a tribe" from Greek - genos "race, kind" and cide from Latin cida "cutter, killer, slayer". The proper formation should actually be genticide.

The Introduction

Mr Grasse states that he use to love travelling to London with its cobblestone streets - most of London (or rather Central London) is not cobblestone only a few places still are and most of them are public walkways.
He says that we hang on to our past and keep it as part of the present - I can only speak for myself here, but I think we hold onto our past because there are some parts we are proud of, but also we hang on as a reminder that we should never attempt to do some things again. I'm proud to have the diverse range of history we have, can we say that about America where they have, mostly, torn down their past or as Joni Mitchell put it they paved paradise and put up a parking lot.
Grasse also says that he has been told his president (George W. Bush) is an idiot, well to put it bluntly, he is, just watch this and tell me he isn't.
He later goes on to claim that Britain blames America for the worlds problems, this is just not true, we blame America for Americas problems.
He calls us all alcoholics, personally I am tee-total because I don't like the effects alcohol has on me, I have been drunk 4 times in my life, I'm 36 by the way, how many times has Mr Grasse been drunk?

My hope is that with this blog I can right some of the wrongs Mr Grasse has published, he obviously hates the British and is a racist.

The Foreword by Penny Rimbaud

Personally I think you can get all the information you need about Rimbaud by looking at his publicity photo HERE, sitting stark naked,on a bin as if having a crap, lovely.

Within the text from the foreword he claims that every true blue-blooded Englander is easy to spot because he has a shaved head, gold earrings and a football shirt or they are part of the collar and tie brigade, well I, for one do not consider myself a "blue-blooded Englander" I consider myself a patriotic British citizen, it is true I have a shaved head but that is because my hair started to fall out and rather than try to hide it, I shaved it (in the same way Mr Grasse has looking at his publicity photo on the same page as before). I don't have any piercings nor do I own a football shirt, and I only wear a collar and tie to social functions such as weddings.

Mr Rimbauld also states that "Britain" as we know it has become what it is because it has been repeatedly invaded by amongst others the Romans, the Anglo Saxons and the Vikings. This is certainly true so why are the "English" to blame? Why not the nations who invaded us?

The "British Empire" that Mr Rimbauld keeps going on (and on and on) about no longer exists, we have seen the error of our ways in much the same way that the Spanish and the Russians have, we no longer want to rule over the other nations, let them do that themselves, that dear reader is called democracy.

Throughout this anti British rant he keeps talking about his father and the war he fought in, well Mr Rimbaud that was over 50 years ago, my grandfather fought in the second world war, although he never talked about it, which was down to the fact he witnessed so many deaths that it permanantly scarred him for life, Mr Rimbaud's father was either made of sterner stuff, or more likely never saw action.

As I said at the start of this post, look at the photo of Mr Rimbaud again, maybe he is working on the next instalment of his racist tirade, SPLASH! There it is now.

The first two inaccuracies

Even the cover of the book is wrong for two reasons.

1 - The subtitle "101 Ways That England Ruined The World" is incorrect, it should be either "Great Britain", "Britain" or "United Kingdom" if we are to believe the second inaccuracy,

2 - The cover picture shows Queen Victoria stomping all over the "little people" carrying the Union Flag, not Union Jack as Mr Grasse puts it (more on that in another post). If the title is correct then the flag should be the cross of St. George.

Not a good start then...

Why I started this blog

This blog has been set up for one reason, I was given a book recently entitled "The Evil Empire - 101 Ways That England Ruined The World" by Steven A. Grasse, and I was looking forward to reading it, as I always enjoy a little friendly mickey taking, but I felt so hurt by Mr Grasse's lies and disinformation that I thought it was time to put the record straight on a few things (or rather 101 things).

So I will endeavour to reply to every single one of Mr Grasse's assertions in time.

Please don't think I hate all Americans, I have a number of American friends, and, for the most part I believe that America has and is doing a lot of good for the world. I just feel that this book should not have been published as, to my mind it is completely racist, almost bordering on extremist rhetoric.


If you would like to buy this "book" then by all means do so by clicking HERE.

Please be aware that I have allowed readers to comment after each post, although I will be moderating them, so, if you leave a racist comment or use foul language I will not allow the post to be seen. If however you simply disagree with what I say and would like to say so, feel free, I would love to hear from as many people as possible.