BS: Queen Mother

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 02:41 PM

The image in question was I think from 1933. Kristallnacht was not until November 1938. We look at 1933 through the glasses of 2015, but in 1933 he was perhaps a bit uncouth, but within the bounds of political normality.

The Queen Mother however was a nasty old snob with very expensive taste in wine.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 02:31 PM

I stand by what I said, Michael, the current government is in power on the basis of the votes of a small minority of those who participated in the election - not 'most other members of this democracy' as you claimed.

Of course I understand the mechanics of our electoral system. I also understand it is seriously flawed, when a party elected by 25% of votes cast is able to claim a majority, and thus take power - which means that the wishes of the other 75% are not taken into account. I find it even more galling when said party conducted a campaign of fear-mongering,, and actively avoided announcing and discussing its policies (they knew very well that, had they announced, before the election, the vile abuses they would inflict on the poor and disadvantaged, whilst seeking to grandly benefit the well-off, including themselves and their cronies, the chances of their winning the election would take a nose-dive).

And you, too, are being disingenuous regarding the rejection of a PR system in the 2011 referendum - both the Conservative and Labour Parties conducted campaigns of spreading doubt and fear of a new system because they were fully aware that PR would result in both losing their guaranteed stranglehold on government, and their guaranteed places as the two largest parties in parliament - they campaigned for what is best for their own political careers, with little or no regard for what is best for the people of the United Kingdom.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 02:15 PM

I think the next Scottish election could well show how ridiculous a first past the post system could potentially be. Commentators are suggesting that it is possible that the SNP may well win every single constituency seat. If it was FPTP then that would leave them with every single member of the Scottish Parliament. This would clearly be absurd as about 50% of Scots say they will vote for someone other than SNP. The Scottish system is far from perfect but it means that the parliament will actually end up much more balanced than that!

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 02:11 PM

"of this democracy in which you find yourself living happen to have different ideas from yours about how they choose to be governed. "
Did I miss a referendum on the monarch? - damn!!
"Did you bother to actually read what the lip reader said?"'
Yes I did - are you aware that the establishent can always find "an expert" to dig them out of trouble when necessary?
It's called "damage limitation".
This family comes with a track record.
Why should good old Uncle Eddie seriously teach the Nazi salute?
Bit of a mystery really!!
Mystery solved
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 02:09 PM

Backwoodsman surely has more than two options? Yes he could just live with the electoral system. Yes he could leave and go elsewhere. But surely another option is to keep arguing his case and hope for another referendum or vote on the issue at some point? You can't tell people just to shut up and sit at the back of the bus!

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 01:43 PM

I am proud to say that my family brought me up to be anti monrchist, when everyone else stood up in cinemas when the national anthem was played we had to sit down,it was great fun.
Funnily enough my father who was a member of the communist party, used to say that he thought the queen mother was one of the best of the monarchy, that during the second world war she went around the east end of london,shortly after it had been bombed trying to raise morale.
however, he also thought ray buckton leader of ASLEF was a good left winger, this was ray buckton who under the fifty year rule, was reporting back to mi5 during the 1973 miners strike on trade union meetings, an informer.
it is easy sometimes to be misled by people at the time.
there were a lot of things wrong with Churchill, but he was one of only a few who were not fascist appeasers, Iam inclined to agree with Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 01:41 PM

BWM -- You know as well as I do that we have a constituency system, which precludes the actual %age of votes cast for any specific party being relevant: it means that the # of members representing parties in Parliament is what counts. A referendum of one-voter-one-vote recently approved of continuing this system and decisively rejected the adoption of any alternative system whereby actual %age of votes would determine the ruling assembly. You know this perfectly well, so stop being disingenuous. No system is perfect; but the present one is the one which has recently been democratically approved by a considerable majority of the electorate.

So, like I said:- Live with it. Or try elsewhere where they might have a system which better conforms to your notions: if you can find one.

Regards azzevva

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 01:32 PM

I'm not a monarchist but I find the they're not British argument a tad silly. On the maternal side the Liz is from a Scottish aristo family heavily mixed with English aristos. On the paternal side yes she has a lot of foreigners in the family tree but the royal line as such can be traced back nigh on 1000 years or so in Scotland and I dare say England too with in all that time only about three generations not being born in Britain. Sophia of Hanover and her son and grandson! But even at that both Sophia and George I would theoretically have qualified to play at rugby for Scotland as Sophia's mother was the Scottish born Princess Elizabeth Stuart sister of Charles I.   

The name thing is daft too. If someone has a German name because their British mother married a German then they are no more or less British than someone who has a British name because their German mother married a Brit.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 01:27 PM

Michael, the present government were elected by 25% of the votes cast in the election. That hardly represents 'most other members of this democracy' does it - even one as brainwashed by Tory propaganda and deceit as you appear to be must surely be able to understand the significance of that statistic?

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,Derrick
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 01:13 PM

Did you bother to actually read what the lip reader said?
Did you lip read the film yourself?
Have you seen the film,or is your opinion based on a preconceived view of the Royals/,which in your opinion is confirmed by your interpretation of the photo
Dismissing the lip reader's reading in the manner you do smacks of the idea that the Royals must be guilty because they are who they are why waste time on a trial.
The lady's work is used by law enforcement agencies so they believe in her interpretation sufficiently to use it in criminal cases.
Most people would give her opinion serious consideration at least, not dismiss it out of hand as you seem to.
All I'm saying is the Royals deserve the same fair trial as anyone else.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 01:07 PM

Well, achmelmevitch, hope you enjoy your good-part-of-every day lucubrations of despair at how most other members of this democracy in which you find yourself living happen to have different ideas from yours about how they choose to be governed. But, there, that's the trouble about living in a democracy, innit? If the ones elected don't suit your rarefied ideas, you just have to swallow the fact & live with it, mate. Or else go somewhere where they might have a system you might prefer.
If you can find any such...

Now, back to my stupor of not realising how grievously oppressed I am being by this 1% you perceive.

1% of what, precisely, BTW? And how did they get into this iniquitous position of elite ruling the other 99%?

Just asking...

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 01:05 PM

You have a point, Achmelvich. However, I'd venture to suggest that it's not simply the existence of a royal as Head of State that's at the root of the stuff you complain about - there is a far stronger 'patriotic, military, establishment-loving nonsense' in the US, which has a federal-based system and an elected Head of State, than there is in the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 12:56 PM

i spend a good part of every day concerning myself with the crimes of the conservatives/1%/ruling elite - this monarchy name thing is to me just an interesting offshoot. however, i can't agree that they have no power today - most significantly in representing a class based system that induces a stupor among people - and all sorts of 'know your place' patriotic, military, estalishment - loving nonsense that leads so many to accept their place as subjects in a deferential and snobbish society.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 12:47 PM

"So would you, Jim -- wouldn't you?"
I've dot the evidence of the Sunday Times photo (front page), with two very straight raised arms anfd two very flat palms to go on - what've they/you got to offer?
Don't suppose the Royals got much passing traffic to practice waving to.
But after all, they were keeping up a family tradition
Gi' us a break Mike!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 12:35 PM

I'm considerably less worried about the power the royal family have (which is very little) than I am about the power held by the toffs of the Conservative party, in particular the arch-criminals Cameron, Osborne and Duncan-Smith, and their continuing abuse of that power.

Instead of getting knickers knotted about something that the royals did 80 years ago, and which affects us not one jot today, why not concentrate on the repeated rape of the common man and woman being perpetrated by those actually in charge of the country right now?

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 12:23 PM

saxe -coburg-gotha? i had heard this name before but assumed it must have been changed long ago. however, i just read that it was only changed after the first world war. surely there must have been plenty of anti-monarchy sentiment around when they weren't even british? how popular was the young elizabeth even before she married the greek guy with even more names? obviously, they have had great PR over the years and we are a particularly supine and conservative nation but.....it's ridiculous isn't it? the whole concept of a monarchy surviving to have so much power and influence in the modern era.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 11:57 AM

Sorry for apparent repetition: thought first posting didn't take so resubmitted in slightly changed form from memory

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 11:53 AM

"They would say that, wouldn't they?
Jim Carroll"
.,,.

So would you, Jim -- wouldn't you?

Cheers

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 09:19 AM

" isn't it inevitable that they would have swung around to become anti's sooner or later"
No
The Queen is married to a closet racist and one of the grand-brats struts his stuff in a Nazi uniform - which, at the very least, shows he is not the brightest starfish in the sand-bucket.
If they are going to stay where they are, they have to learn to do their job properly and show respect for the people who pay their wages, otherwise we might have to advertise the job (assuming that is still has relevance in the 21st century, of course) - plenty of people out there looking for work
The attitude of Royalty, the politicians and the establishment in general, to the appeasement of rising Nazism is a subject very much brushed under the carpet and not talked about - no harm in taking a close-up look now and again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST, ^*^
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 09:10 AM

No one would do a Nazi salute who didn't mean it, right?

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,Derrick
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 08:48 AM

I did say make what you will of it.

What I also say is have you attempted to lip read the film yourself?, or is your answer based on a biased view of Royalty.
Many people interpret the world according to their beliefs which may or may not be correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Mooh
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 08:35 AM

Sure, it is hard to read history backwards.

I'm too young and not English, plus my veteran father rarely spoke of his wartime service in England and Europe, nasty stuff it was.

But may I ask...

Regardless of the royal attitude about Hitler in the '30s, isn't it inevitable that they would have swung around to become anti's sooner or later? Political interests swing a lot, usually in favour of self-preservation and once it was realized that Hitler wouldn't allow for the preservation of anything English, isn't it obvious that there would be no preservation of a crown with no country? Also, would not the resources of the royals be the easiest for Hitler to steal in finance his objectives?

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 08:35 AM

They would say that, wouldn't they?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,Derrick
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 08:31 AM

I'm not particularly bothered one way or the other about the Royals.
I think that film and photographs can easily be misunderstood with out all the information surrounding what is shown.
Several newspapers and other sources report a claim by a lip reading expert that the film is just a typical piece of family footage and not
what some people think it is.
Make of it what you wish.
This particular piece came from the Daily Mail,other papers echo it.


"One of Britain's leading lip readers has cast doubt over a video claiming to show the Queen performing a Nazi salute, insisting that the seven-year-old princess was simply waving on the instruction of her father.

Jessica Rees - who has worked with the National Crime Squad, The National Criminal Intelligence Service the Metropolitan Police and the FBI interpreting the spoken word - has insisted that Her Majesty is only raising her right arm to perform a playful royal wave.

Having studied the footage in depth, forensic lip reader Ms Rees - who was born deaf - is adamant that the future Queen and her three-year-old sister, Princess Margaret, throw their arms in the air after being instructed by Prince Edward to 'give a wave' to a passing woman, who can't be seen in the grainy footage, released by The Sun last week."


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3166822/Was-Queen-just-WAVING-Lip-reading-expert-claims-Edward-VIII-encouraging-princess-gesture-shot-WASN-T-teaching-Nazi-salute.html#ixzz3gL2toUUz
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 07:26 AM

Why don't our wonderful media start an "anti monarchy" campaign...now that would be a real move for "equality"

I must be dreaming!! :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 07:21 AM

Completely agree with you on this one Will,....as they say on Mudcat, "time to move on".....after seventy years! ;0)

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Stu
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 07:13 AM

A load of rich Germans sticking up for a load of political Germans. Hardly any surprise there, surely?

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 07:05 AM

"in this day and age I somehow doubt it."
Probably could be right about the kids Will - it's the adults that continue to worry me.
I was unfortunately put in a position of having to watch the (last) royal wedding (a guest in somebody else's home) - still getting over the waves of nausea at the sycophancy.
Happily, one clip has become a regular feature in 'Have I Got More News For you'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 06:47 AM

Another of your gnomic responses, SS -- 0624 am. Once again I lack the privilege of the remotest idea of what you mean. But once again do not trouble to elucidate as I am sure it doesn't matter in the least.

Ho-hum... ≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Raggytash
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 06:32 AM

Dave, fancy a bet on who turns out to be a monarchist?

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Raggytash
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 06:25 AM

I'm not so sure Will. Apparently the outfit that was worn by George at the christening of his sister (don't know her name) flew off the shelves in the days afterwards.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 06:24 AM

In derision? Gosh. Talk about clutching at straws!

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Will Fly
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 06:21 AM

You're flogging a dead horse, Jim - there are many of us here old enough to be aware of the amount of pro-German and anti-German feeling in many areas of British society. It's not exactly new, or newsworthy for that matter.

As for our children perceiving the monarchy as role models - in this day and age I somehow doubt it.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 06:15 AM

"That evidence alone proves absolutely nothing about allegiances one way or the other."
There's more than one photograph to base our opinions on - if the King hadn't married a divorcee, we would have had a monarch who admired and befriended Hitler.
The nobility was riddled with fascists before and during the war; the Duke of Wellington helped set up a 'Government-in-waiting preparing for "Herr Hitler's victory" - on his deathbed, he was said to be still cursing "the Yids".
All a long time ago, but my generation was brought up to respect, and even revere these people, and the family is still paraded in front of us as role models for our children
Nowadays they are little more than window dressing, but it's still worth making sure the curtains are clean
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 06:09 AM

Nazi salutes were often given in derision. Early in WWii itself, I recall, there was a round dance to the distinguished songwriter [Red Sails In The Sunset, South of the Border &c &c &c] Jimmy Kennedy's satirical song, We're Going To Hang Up The Washing On The Siegfried Line, which involved goose-stepping in a circle giving a pretend Nazi salute. Putting a forefinger across the upper lip to represent a pretend moustache and exclaiming Heil Hitler while giving a pretend Nazi salute was a popular game among small children.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Will Fly
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 06:01 AM

Before we all start thumping our respective tubs from our own particular moral or historical viewpoint, it might be as well to remember that the object under scrutiny is a photograph of members of the then monarchy laughing and giving a Nazi salute.

That evidence alone proves absolutely nothing about allegiances one way or the other. They may have been doing it with admiration - or they may have been doing it in derision - or they may just have been having a laugh. Trust the Sun to raise its readership to publish a photograph of a child doing such a thing stir a little shit and sell some more papers.

I have no brief for the Royal Family, but I know that I don't really care what their affiliations and attitudes were back in the 1930s - and I certainly won't be contributing to any debate, one way or the other, by the amateur historians of Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 05:45 AM

Par for the course. Why anyone should be surprised that this bunch of degenerate parasites behaves like this is beyond me. Why, it makes me feel almost slitty-eyed.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 05:39 AM

Never forget time and place, Mussolini was adored by the "intelligentsia", a large part of British and American commerce saw Fascism as the only alternative to the spread of Communism in Europe.
My old friend told me of pitched battles in the East End of London between Fascists and Communists public support was split pretty evenly between the factions.

A different time a different place.....If we had been beaten history would have been written by the victors.

If these people and their children had held up the "closed fist" a different crowd would be knocking on their coffins.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 05:29 AM

We are fully aware of the Royal families' friendship with Hitler.
Our buddy Adolph
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 05:07 AM

You can't do history backwards ! And you cannot draw conclusions from documents you have no read.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 05:03 AM

For Clapton's sake, does it really matter after all these years?
Yeah - we might as well forgive and forget the people they were saluting while we're at it
Waddya think?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 04:58 AM

For Clapton's sake, does it really matter after all these years?

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 04:21 AM

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/apr/14/uk.queenmother

In the spring of 1939 George VI instructed his private secretary to write to Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax. Having learnt that 'a number of Jewish refugees from different countries were surreptitiously getting into Palestine', the King was 'glad to think that steps are being taken to prevent these people leaving their country of origin.' Halifax's office telegraphed Britain's ambassador in Berlin asking him to encourage the German government 'to check the unauthorised emigration' of Jews.

Cambridge University's library still holds correspondence between members of the royal household and Tory Minister Sir Samuel Hoare, a leading appeaser. Key documents remain 'unavailable'.

In 2000 the Bodleian Library at Oxford University published papers lodged with it by the family of Lord Monckton, lawyer to the Prince of Wales. One cache, 'Box 24', was kept private. A civil servant briefed on the contents of Box 24 claimed it included evidence of the Queen Mother's pro-appeasement sympathies.

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 04:18 AM

Just looking around on t'web and found this from the Independent on Sunday:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/bookchapters/WSC/Monckton.html

"Experts assumed that the papers had been suppressed because they contained vitriolic remarks by the Queen Mother about the Duchess of Windsor. This, senior government sources have told the Independent on Sunday, is not the case. The reason that papers were withheld is potentially far more embarrassing: they spell out the true extent of the Queen Mother's pro-appeasement views on the brink of the Second World War.

The papers, part of a collection of letters belonging to the first Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, a close friend of Edward VIII, dwell on the relationship between the Queen Mother and the pro-appeasement foreign secretary Lord Halifax (left). The letters are said to show her hostility towards Churchill and her desire that the deeply unpopular Halifax be Prime Minister instead.

The letters, which include private correspondence between the Queen Mother and Halifax himself, suggest the battle to preserve the monarchy was a concern which weighed above all others. As leader, Halifax was likely to have sued for peace with Hitler on the understanding that he allowed the monarchy to continue under a Nazi occupation."

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 04:10 AM

Note I'm not making any assumptions about this film, its meaning or anything and I'm not too interested in dissecting it.

I'm curious about the Queen Mother and who she was (apart from being a hideous old snob by all accounts).

Subject: RE: BS: Queen Mother
From: Raggytash
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 03:58 AM

Some of the public CS, some of the public.

Subject: BS: Queen Mother
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 19 Jul 15 - 03:54 AM

I'm sure many of you will have seen the headlines about the Queen performing a Nazi salute at the behest of her mother and uncle.

It's obviously a nonsense to criticise the Queen - a young child - in this context. I'm quite curious however at the complete lack of reference to her mother in the film.

Edward was - so I understand - a probable Nazi sympathiser, and the papers do make mention of this. But I wonder why no-one seems to be discussing his sister in law - then married to the King - in this film. After she's the one actually teaching her daughter the Nazi salute in these images. Does anyone know anything about the old lady or her possible political sympathies? Did she share Edward's admiration for HItler?

She was for decades utterly adored and worshipped by the media and public alike. But it's almost as though she's invisible in these images so far as news commentary on them is concerned.