NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.guardian.co.uk/monarchy/story/0,2763,1389624,00.html

Although clearly offensive. I think it is very funny that a bunch of toffs think it is ok to have a party with the theme "colonials and natives". Idiots!

Seems to have been deleted.

Seems to have been deleted.

I've changed the link, this one is not deleted!!!

Yes!!! Someone listened to my idea!

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7932591&postcount=16

lol I bet the German media will be all over this!

Hm. It was just a uniform. Maybe if he had worn an armband with a smiley face, things wouldn't have been so bad.

Not that I care, I'm not British.

Yes!!! Someone listened to my idea!

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7932591&postcount=16h hum

Hm. It was just a uniform. Maybe if he had worn and armband with a smiley face, things wouldn't have been so bad.

Oh no! Then he'd be a Zen Fascist! (if i caught that reference right :p)

It's remarkebal that no one seems to be offended by the tastefull theme of the party.

I guess I don't care to much about the uniform. I just laughed at the idea of a load of upper class idiots saying something like "Shall we have a colonials and natives party?"
"yes that sounds like a splendid idea"
As if it the early twentieth century!

Oh no! Then he'd be a Zen Fascist! (if i caught that reference right :p)

;)

It's remarkebal that no one seems to be offended by the tastefull theme of the party.

Oh, don't worry, I thought that was great too. Gotta love them tasteful royals.

;)

Thought so. :p

anyone have a link to a picture of him in said uniform?

anyone have a link to a picture of him in said uniform?
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,grossbild-425565-336618,00.html

I guess I don't care to much about the uniform. I just laughed at the idea of a load of upper class idiots saying something like "Shall we have a colonials and natives party?"
"yes that sounds like a splendid idea"
As if it the early twentieth century!

Yeah. Fail to see how a WWII German Afrika Corps uniform with a swasika armband fits into the theme of Colonials and Natives. When I hear that I think Redcoats and Zulus. Harry shouldn't be able to go to Sandhurst on the simple fact that he doesn't know his history. But then again, William showed up at the party dressed as a lion.

more reason to boot the royals out.

out of touch and out of control

I would suggest that this reveals where his sympathies lie.

well its a picture of a white guy in a nazi out fit anyway.

Oh, don't worry, I thought that was great too. Gotta love them tasteful royals.
It wasn't a Royal party. They were the guests of Harry Mead. Son of Richard Meade.

Dicky Arbiter, a former royal press spokesman, said he felt sorry for the Prince of Wales. "Once again, he has been let down by his wayward son. Every time there is some good, there is lots of bad. And it can't go on," Mr Arbiter told the Today programme.

Am I the only one to find that funny?

However I think we are losing sight of the issue:

Prince William dressed as a big cat in a leopardskin leotard with matching tail and paws

I for what am disappointed with, he should at least have worn a lion suit and sang "I just can't wait to be king."

And what the fuck do Nazis and leopards have to do with Colonials and natives?

Harry the Pothead!

Wait.. Was that him or his brother? Can't remember.

It wasn't a Royal party. They were the guests of Harry Mead. Son of Richard Meade.

Oh, my bad. "upper-class" party then. :)

The Queen must be livid.

On hearing about this the first words out of her mouth must have been:
"My Grandson wore what?!"

Oh if he had only worn a flight suit kit of the RAF from the Battle of Britain.

http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,grossbild-425565-336618,00.html
He looks more like he is tying to be Sid Vicious than a nazi

The Queen must be livid.

On hearing about this the first words out of her mouth must have been:
"My Grandson wore what?!"

Oh if he had only worn a flight suit kit of the RAF from the Battle of Britain.

He takes it after his great uncle. (is there meant to be an extra great there?)

The British Royals having a link with the Nazis is nothing new. They visited Hitler in the 30's.

He takes it after his great uncle. (is there meant to be an extra great there?)

Yup, I think it should be great great uncle: his great uncle would be Prince Phillip or the Queen's brother (if they had one).

did you hear on tv the consprisory thorery the royals wasnt human

did you hear on tv the consprisory thorery the royals wasnt human
Yay.

Fun with David Icke.

The current Royals are descended from George I who was imported from Germany (Hanover) when they ran out of Englishmen. Good to see loyalty to the homeland! :p

Wow, I didn't realise there was such a general distaste of the British royalty. Personally, I don't really care about them anyway but this action certainly calls into question why people freak out over stuff like that.

Don't get me wrong, I don't approve of the Nazi perspective on race at all. But I wonder what it would be like if America one day fell. I bet sixty years after the fact people would equally panic if some random celebrity dressed as an american soldier.

Fun with David Icke.

How come when with the French a goalkeeper decides to write a couple of books explaining his view of the world, they get Albert Camus, and we get David Icke?

Wow, I didn't realise there was such a general distaste of the British royalty. Personally, I don't really care about them anyway but this action certainly calls into question why people freak out over stuff like that.

Don't get me wrong, I don't approve of the Nazi perspective on race at all. But I wonder what it would be like if America one day fell. I bet sixty years after the fact people would equally panic if some random celebrity dressed as an american soldier.

The US government isn't exactly cuddly. but I wouldn't say they were as bad as the Nazis!

EDIT: on reflection, I realise that, that may not have been the point you were trying to make!

That kid must be thick as a brick.

How come when with the French a goalkeeper decides to write a couple of books explaining his view of the world, they get Albert Camus, and we get David Icke?
:D

Maybe they had a better defence which gave him more time to think.

Don't get me wrong, I don't approve of the Nazi perspective on race at all. But I wonder what it would be like if America one day fell. I bet sixty years after the fact people would equally panic if some random celebrity dressed as an american soldier.

What an interesting scenario.

Personally, I don't care what he gets up to.

He's the retard of the royal family, and considering their average level of intelligence, that's saying something.

I think he takes after his grandfather (Prince Phillip's slitty eyed people anyone?)

Eitherway, I bet Grand Mama was most pissed off :p

Having said all that, I love the royal family. Ok, I don't love the royal family but I love the fact that we still have a monarchy.

That kid must be thick as a brick.
For doing it in the first place or for not realising that Nazis don't really have anything to do with colonials and natives.

But something makes me think that if he dressed as an African tribesman (avec black and white minstrels makeup) he would be in a whole new world of shit.

But at least his costume would have something to do with the theme.

"Well OK I'm royal and your your royal so we''ll interbreed and watch our IQ go down the toilet" - Eddie Izzard (Not and exact quotation)

Don't get me wrong, I don't approve of the Nazi perspective on race at all. But I wonder what it would be like if America one day fell. I bet sixty years after the fact people would equally panic if some random celebrity dressed as an american soldier.

Fell into an evil fascism or fell completely? I hope you are not equating the outrage to the fall of the government instead of the acts beforehand.

There would not be any outrage (very little at least) if an American celebrity dressed up as a Confederate soldier, but if they dressed up as a slaveholder there would be a huge uproar.

For doing it in the first place or for not realising that Nazis don't really have anything to do with colonials and natives.

For not realizing that dressing up as a nazi would cause an uproar. I am pretty sure that the British are not too fond of Nazis and that it is pretty common knowledge.

But something makes me think that if he dressed as an African tribesman (avec black and white minstrels makeup) he would be in a whole new world of shit.

Yes, the nature of the party shows that the crowd he associates with is equally as distant and dense as he is.

But at least his costume would have something to do with the theme.

Seeing him in blackface and war paint, wearing a loin cloth would have made for a more entertaining picture as well.

Yes in general, the British see the royals for what they are: inbred, ignorant and xenophobic.

Let's take a fond retrospective look at Prince Phillip's (Harry The Nazi's grandad) shall we?

1967 When asked if he would like to visit the Soviet Union) "The bastards murdered half my family.."

(1981 A comment during the UK's recession) "Everybody was saying we must have more leisure. Now they are complaining they are unemployed.."

(1982 To Solomon Islanders, on being told that their population growth was 5% a year) "You must be out of your minds.."

(1984 On receiving a gift from a Kenyan native woman) "You are a woman aren't you?.."

(1986 To a group of British students in China) "If you stay here much longer you'll all be slittyeyed.."

(To a Cayman Islander) "Aren't most of you descended from pirates?.."

(c. 1990 To a British expat in Hungary) "You can't have been here that long, you haven't got a potbelly yet.."

(1995 To a Scottish driving instructor in Oban) "How do you keep the natives off the booze for long enough to pass their test?.."

(1998 To a student who'd trekked in Papua New Guinea) "You managed not to get eaten then?.."

(1999 On seeing a fuse box while being shown around an Edinburgh factory) "It looks as though it was put in by an Indian.."

(2002 To a school band in Cairns, Australia) "You were playing your instruments weren't you?, or do you have tape recorders under your seats?.."

(2002 To an Aboriginal man on Australia's Tjapukai Aboriginal Cultural Park) "Do you still throw spears at each other..?

(2002 Commenting during the Jubilee tour) "If you travel as much as we do you appreciate how much more comfortable aircraft have become. Unless you travel in something called economy class, which sounds ghastly.."

(2002 Commenting on the London traffic debate, after mayor Ken Livingstone forced through his plan to charge motorists £5 to enter the city) "The problem with London is the tourists. They cause the congestion. If we could just stop tourism we could stop the congestion.."

(Summer 2002 Aboard the floating restaurant 'Il Punto' on the river Orwell in Ipswich, after thoroughly enjoying an excellent full English breakfast) "French cooking's all very well, but they can't do a decent English breakfast.." (Il Punto is owned by Frenchman Regis Crepy..)

(2003 visiting a school, asking a tubby little boy what he wanted to be when he grows up, and being told, 'an astronaut') "You'll have to lose a bit of weight first.."


Charming man. Charming family.

Yes in general, the British see the royals for what they are: inbred, ignorant and xenophobic.

Let's take a fond retrospective look at Prince Phillip's (Harry The Nazi's grandad) shall we?

...

Charming man. Charming family.

You might want to also do some research on Edward VIII.

I don't think that he should have said sorry. Its just the media making a big thing out of nothing.

I don't think that he should have said sorry. Its just the media making a big thing out of nothing.

What would have been more acceptable? Dressing up as a member of the KKK? As the cambridge rapist? As Idi Amin?

Feh, I don't find it offensive at all. It is a coustume. Everyone should stop being so freaking sensitive.

The current Royals are descended from George I who was imported from Germany (Hanover) when they ran out of Englishmen. Good to see loyalty to the homeland! :p


Yeah you kicked us Scotts out. My ancestors came to America one jump away from the British noose.

Hey I tell you what, if you want I'll be your King. I'll even give the Head of the Church of England spot to the Archbishop of Canterbury, The Head of the Common Wealth spot to the Prime Minister, and sign over all royal lands and holdings (like the City of Manchester) to Parliament, charitable organizations, (and members of the House of Lords for their support. ;) )

All I ask is for a good size flat in Knights bridge, a hundred thousand pounds a year, a government car, expenses for travel if you want me to go dedicate something, and a small security team.

For that comparably small pittance I'll be you constitutional lynchpin. The Prime Minister can even drop by once a week for a chat, I promise I'll keep stocked in aged Single Malt Scotch and cigars.

The only thing is don't kneel, bow, or curtsy to me, (I'll just laugh), and I'm not big on the idea of a crown. Jeweled headdresses on men just look silly.

What would have been more acceptable? Dressing up as a member of the KKK? As the cambridge rapist? As Idi Amin?
George Bush?

Feh, I don't find it offensive at all. It is a coustume. Everyone should stop being so freaking sensitive.

I don't find it offensive: instead I find it mind-numbingly stupid. These pictures are going to keep cropping up again and agian in years to come. The House of Windsor already has a history of dubious Nazi connections, and this kind of incident just drags those back into the light.

So I have hated the royals for years (can't stand the way they manage to pronounce the word 'years' as 'hyaas') They're all rabid facists anyway. Look at Phil the Greek (The Duke of Edinburgh) he is off his rocker. However the fact that Harry has upset Michael Howard who is the Conservative leader and a racist himself (although Jewish) shows this is serious sh*t going down.
Line them all up and shoot them i say :sniper: :mp5:

You might want to also do some research on Edward VIII.

Have done. The royals have a Long line of dubious history.

The Windsors used to be the Gothas, but changed the name after WW1.

The Windsors used to be the Gothas, but changed the name after WW1.

Technically they used to be the house of Saxe-Coburg-Gothas IIRC.

Yep.

Wasn't it Battenburg but they changed it to Mountbatten?

"line em all up and shoot em...."
sounds like someones hoarding communist urges..... :mp5:

So I have hated the royals for years (can't stand the way they manage to pronounce the word 'years' as 'hyaas')


Yes! I've noticed that too... Over the hyaas. It's not just them though, it's an epidemic amongst snots.

And lets not forget Ellen Mcarthur in that bloody advert. "Is it fur?" instead of "Is it fair?"

FAIR NOT FUR!

I'm not sure about the Mountbattens, I think they were the Queen's cousins.

One of them got blown up by the IRA as he sailed on his large boat.

What would have been more acceptable? Dressing up as a member of the KKK? As the cambridge rapist? As Idi Amin?
I'd consider all of them acceptable.

I'd consider all of them acceptable.

Would you consider anything to be unacceptable, or at least ill-advised?

At least prince harry eventually took off the costume. What if he got used to wearing it and decided on using it on a daily basis? With his blue eyes and blond hair he would make quite the Nazi superman!

Wasn't it Battenburg but they changed it to Mountbatten?
The current Queen is Windsor (originally, S-C-G), Phils is Mountbatten

I'm not sure about the Mountbattens, I think they were the Queen's cousins.

we are talking about the royals remember ;)

I can't believe all this, it's only a bl*"~y uniform that he wore to a fancy dress party! BIG DEAL, NOT!

I can't believe all this, it's only a bl*"~y uniform that he wore to a fancy dress party! BIG DEAL, NOT!
It was a colonial and native themed fancy dress party.

If I'm not allowed to turn up to black tie functions in a frock then we should he be allowed to go to a fancy dress party in a costume unrelated to the theme?

I can't believe all this, it's only a bl*"~y uniform that he wore to a fancy dress party! BIG DEAL, NOT!

I agree, to an extent. But then I'm not closely related to any of the Nazi's victims, nor am I a target for current Nazi hatred, I can understand that people in those positions may feel offended by this.

I still think it's funny that the royals and their friends have had a 'Colonials and Natives' party in 2005!

*A big guy with a beards and frizzy hair leans over*

"You're a Nazi, Harry"

Look I'm an ardent anti-royalist, for a huge number of reasons.

When I first saw this my first thought was honestly amusement, then I thought about it and really though I'd love to critise Harry I find it a little difficult considering I went to the producers recently, argued strongly that the bbc were right to show Jerry Springer the Opera.

Really he made himself look like a tit, which just puts pay to all the rumours that he might not be related to Phil the Greek....

Let me just say this.

He's what, twenty years old? For his entire life he has been hounded by the media, and it is NOT his choice. He was born into it. When he tries to do something like a lot of us have done, be it drinking yourself stupid, smoking cannabis, having a laugh, etc, it's suddenly a massive event and he's a terrible person.

Here's an idea. Leave the kid alone. Don't keep forcing your left-wing views into the media, especially the Sun newspaper, shouting about how inappropriate it is.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

This got me thinking, has anyone ever seen a hairy nazi?

Dam it was 60years ago!
If I would wear a russian uniform (UDSSR) no one would be intrested!
But if you are in the public...

It was just a bad jocke :-)

Relax and watch more Southpark! (specialy the episode: "the passion of the jues")

Let me just say this.

He's what, twenty years old? For his entire life he has been hounded by the media, and it is NOT his choice. He was born into it. When he tries to do something like a lot of us have done, be it drinking yourself stupid, smoking cannabis, having a laugh, etc, it's suddenly a massive event and he's a terrible person.

Here's an idea. Leave the kid alone. Don't keep forcing your left-wing views into the media, especially the Sun newspaper, shouting about how inappropriate it is.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

I think you are a little mis-guided as to the Suns politics. I don't know anyone who regards themselves as left-wing, who reads the sun. and if you read any of the Sun you will see why.

As someone who considers myself to be slightly left-wing, I couldn't give a shit about Harry's drinking, smoking or Drug taking, and I am not personally offended by his Nazi uniform, but I can understand there are some who would be.

If the Royals don't like all the media attention. why don't they give all our money back, and give up there titles and priviledge and live like the rest of us?

If I have mis-interpreted what you wrote, don't worry about it, but you were calling the Sun a left-wing paper, right?

I think you;ll find its not as simple as just giving it all up. As for the Sun, yeah kinda got that wrong, but their actions are, in my opinion, disgraceful. Ditto the entire media. They have blown this completely out of proportion. Its not as if he goes around goose-stepping and throwing his arm in the air is it? So he shouldn't be called a Nazi. "HArry dresses like Nazi" maybe. but not "Harry the Nazi".

I have a jumper with the Finnish flag on it. When I wear it, I don't magically become Finnish do I? No, I'm still a bitter Monarchist Scot.

I think you;ll find its not as simple as just giving it all up. As for the Sun, yeah kinda got that wrong, but their actions are, in my opinion, disgraceful. Ditto the entire media. They have blown this completely out of proportion. Its not as if he goes around goose-stepping and throwing his arm in the air is it? So he shouldn't be called a Nazi. "HArry dresses like Nazi" maybe. but not "Harry the Nazi".

I have a jumper with the Finnish flag on it. When I wear it, I don't magically become Finnish do I? No, I'm still a bitter Monarchist Scot.

The thread is entitled: Harry the Nazi?
as opposed too: Harry the Nazi!

Perhaps it's not as simple as giving it all up. My point was we all have to deal with things that are beyond our control, similarly we have benefits that are not of our making too! I don't doubt that the papparazzi are stressful to deal with, but then so are CCJs

this is so cool i think the enite forum must be about my naiton because there are no other countires named harryalndia an i am a evil dicftator so it must be about me.
WHOO HOO!

Are you on Cocaine?

The thread is entitled: Harry the Nazi?
as opposed too: Harry the Nazi!


I was actually talking about the front page of the Sun.

I don't find it offensive: instead I find it mind-numbingly stupid. These pictures are going to keep cropping up again and agian in years to come. The House of Windsor already has a history of dubious Nazi connections, and this kind of incident just drags those back into the light.

Yes, somebody could think it is stupid because other people will think that you are a nazi, even though it was a joke. But it is not Harry who is dumb, the politically-correct whiners are.

I was actually talking about the front page of the Sun.

Ah fair enough!

I agree!!! (With your criticism of the front page of the Sun)

Shock horror! Royal Family associated with Nazism! I don't find his costume particularly offensive personally, though it's understandable some people might. If wouldn't have a problem with wearing it myself, but then I'm not paid hundreds of thousands of pounds by the British people each year.

The British Monarchy (and establishment) has been associated with Nazism from the start. Hell, Princess Michael of Kent was a member of the Nazi party. Why are we shocked?

That's unfair to expect kids to grow up under the pressure of being a royal and all the media intrusion that goes with it. The Head of State should choose to be head of state and be chosen by the people. I say hold elections for adults (the current royals should be allowed to stand) and lets keep the kids out of this.

There's really no logical reason for royalty, it messes up both our country and the poor buggers themselves. Lets start again from the top, I say.

All it shows is that Harry is:

a] stupid
b] ignorant
c] foolish

I have plenty of relatives who died in the Holocaust, and those who remain don't need to see some idiot boy, so stupid that there's nothing for him to do except become a polish-boy at Sandhurst, wear a uniform that shows how ignorant he is of the past. Someone should educate him, and teach him the meaning of taste!

Hell, Princess Michael of Kent was a member of the Nazi party. Why are we shocked?

I don't think the Nazi party were accepting members who were aged only four months. I think you might mean her father.

You see people, all the more reason to make me your King, and once I get a hold if royal assets, gifts for everyone. And hey, I'm not even inbred or, mentaly disabled.

OK, I know all the women and like half the men of the UK have the hots for William, but he might not even want to be King. Then what are you left with, the poor freak in the Nazi uniform.

The same act of Parliment that took my family out and placed the Queen's family in can make the change. Come on give me a shot at the job.

Everybody else remember the article a month and change back where Charles lambasted some assistant for trying to "rise above her station"? And now we're hearing defense of Harry because "he's just a kid" and "who among us hasn't done something this stupid"?

Well, I haven't. And I'm probably 2 billionth in line for the throne, not 3rd.

The royals can't cut this both ways. Charles can't claim divine right and superior station while defending poor misguided Harry as just your average Tom or Dick.

If the royals want to claim exceptionality, they better behave exceptionally.

who cares? let him do what he wants god it's not a big deal! :headbang: :headbang:

People are making jokes out of this, and its a complete disgrace.

I feel disgust that the fact so many people in Britain (and other countries) died to depose Hitler's Nazi regime, and to keep the Royal family on their precious throne.

This is even more of a sign that if the Royals royalties (no pun intended) lie with their Nazi bretherin then well its time they went off and joined them, preferably by a bullet from the barrel of a very big gun.

People will probably say I'm being to serious but come on HARRY has to respect the position hes in, if he can't act responsibly then someone better damn well teach him to.

oh for gods sake.

so he wore a nazi outfit, that doesnt mean he is a nazi.

it doesnt mean the royal family are all raving facists.

i always thought better of harry rather than william although i also thought he had some brain cells, its not clever or funny and how stupid was he to not think that people would find out. more time consideration unless we see him in full ss gear and jack boots out in town

Yes, somebody could think it is stupid because other people will think that you are a nazi, even though it was a joke. But it is not Harry who is dumb, the politically-correct whiners are.
Yeah, Micheal Howard alway leads the charge of the PC brigade :rolleyes:

what the hell was he thinking?
i do think he gets a lot of flak for doing normal 20 year old things like drinking or whatever, but i think most people know that wearing a nazi costume in ANY SITUATION is NOT A GOOD IDEA cuz it is incredibly insensitive.
and colonials and natives? whose brilliant idea was that?

i never realized how many british ppl hate the royals. not so much press about that here in the US.

but i think most people know that wearing a nazi costume in ANY SITUATION is NOT A GOOD IDEA cuz it is incredibly insensitive.

Well I've done it before (although I didn't go so far to have any swastikas), but I was young and stupid. And apparently I looked too camp to be taken seriously.

and colonials and natives? whose brilliant idea was that?
Were you under the impression that the British upper classes are known for their good taste?

It was just a costume at a costume party. Shut up and get over it.

Precisely! Just leave the Royal Family to what they want to do, wear, say etc. Just because he has a Nazi uniform on means nothing! I wore a vampire outfit to my college's last halloween party but i'm not going round biting people's necks and worshipping WhiteSnake!

Give it a f**king rest! ******* *****!!!!!

Just leave the Royal Family to what they want to do, wear, say etc.

Seeing as how we are paying their wages, I think we have a right to comment, at the very least.

I like Harry- hes the only human in that family of fucking freaks whos in touch with reality.

I like Harry- hes the only human in that family of fucking freaks whos in touch with reality.

Dude it's the British who are out of touch with reality. The royal family is a display like a fancy doll house. A unreal perfect little world you've created and placed your dolls in. I'm not saying that the royals didn't encourage this perception to hold on against reason, but the UK is the owner of the doll house.

The dolls have a lot of problems just like papered pure bread dogs. Genetics can be a bitch when your field of play is curtailed. Pure breads can be sweet and loving, but each breed has it's problems. The titled British upper class has theirs, but that doesn't mean that they aren't good to put on show. In the eligible bachelor division William has been taking best of show, too bad Harry piddled on the carpet in front of the judges.

Dude it's the British who are out of touch with reality. The royal family is a display like a fancy doll house. A unreal perfect little world you've created and placed your dolls in. I'm not saying that the royals didn't encourage this perception to hold on against reason, but the UK is the owner of the doll house.

The dolls have a lot of problems just like papered pure bread dogs. Genetics can be a bitch when your field of play is curtailed. Pure breads can be sweet and loving, but each breed has it's problems. The titled British upper class has theirs, but that doesn't mean that they aren't good to put on show. In the eligible bachelor division William has been taking best of show, too bad Harry piddled on the carpet in front of the judges.

So even though the majority of British people dont support a royal family, it's somehow our fault that these chumps are around?
Harry kicks ass, man. Fuck this polo playing, white smiled, public appearance image and go out smokin weed, smackin papparazis and dressin like a nazi. Now that's what i call rebelling

What more could you expect from the guy who did pot and punched reporters? Too bad they cant behead him...

So even though the majority of British people dont support a royal family, it's somehow our fault that these chumps are around?
Harry kicks ass, man. Fuck this polo playing, white smiled, public appearance image and go out smokin weed, smackin papparazis and dressin like a nazi. Now that's what i call rebelling


Yes, if the UK is a democracy. Really the only difference between you and Margaret Thatcher on the subject of the Royals, is that you like the "Rebellious Breeds". Margaret Thatcher prefers her "Queen".

What more could you expect from the guy who did pot...

Because as everyone knows, all weed smokers are Nazis.....

The current Queen is Windsor (originally, S-C-G), Phils is Mountbatten



we are talking about the royals remember ;)

phil the greek and his uncle were von battanburgs.

although born in greece, he is not a greek citizen, never has been, never applied, he is a prussian, or a German depending on how you like to look at things.

the house of windsor was created sometime early last century as the house of saxe coburg gothe wasn't really seen as british.

there hasn't been british blood in the royals since the chucks copped it, and they were francophiles as well as francophones.

although with the decease di, and the possibility that Juniors dad was Major Squidgy, it maybe if chuck and HIS lad cop it, they might get someone with british blood (although a bit of a bongboy and thumper) as king ;)

Yes, if the UK is a democracy. Really the only difference between you and Margaret Thatcher on the subject of the Royals, is that you like the "Rebellious Breeds". Margaret Thatcher prefers her "Queen".

You know, as a leftie-pinko anarchist I find that comparison rather offensive. I never said I liked the royals, in fact I said that I liked the fact that Harry was rebelling against this image of the royal family.

You know, as a leftie-pinko anarchist I find that comparison rather offensive. I never said I liked the royals, in fact I said that I liked the fact that Harry was rebelling against this image of the royal family.


LMAO :D

Yeah but somewhere somehow they caught you into the whole royals game. In America we can laugh at Americans who get obsessed with the royals, in England that's part of your culture. It's plastered in your media everywhere, love them or hate them they remain. Presented regally in the times or in the tabloid press pillory, you may not follow them but you'll watch what they do.

Ha! Ha! That is ridiculous! Can royal family members not even dress up as nazis? I don't think he should have to apologise for that - i've seen a few folk dressed up as the Gestapo or Hitler, none of them seemed to be splattered across the Sun.

phil the greek and his uncle were von battanburgs.

although born in greece, he is not a greek citizen, never has been, never applied, he is a prussian, or a German depending on how you like to look at things.

the house of windsor was created sometime early last century as the house of saxe coburg gothe wasn't really seen as british.

there hasn't been british blood in the royals since the chucks copped it, and they were francophiles as well as francophones.

although with the decease di, and the possibility that Juniors dad was Major Squidgy, it maybe if chuck and HIS lad cop it, they might get someone with british blood (although a bit of a bongboy and thumper) as king ;)

You know I get very sick of republican idiots (the two terms are virtually synonymous ) saying as an argument "Why should we keep the Queen, she's German!" A bit of lesson on history and British immigration me thinks.

POINT 1: BRITAIN'S POLICY IS IF YOU ARE BORN IN THE COUNTRY, YOU ARE A BRITISH CITIZEN. THIS IS A CRUCIAL POINT. THIS HAS BEEN THE STANDARD FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND REMAINS THE STANDARD TODAY.

With that in mind lets continue:

POINT 2:
George III was not German - he was born and raised in Britain
George IV was not German - he was born and raised in Britain
William IV was not German - he was born and raised in Britain
Victoria was not German - she was born and raised in Britain although she did marry a German.
Edward VII was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain. We do not judge the nationality of the heir by the nationality of the lesser parent. If that were so Charles would be Greek.
George V was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain
Edward VIII was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain
George VI was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain
Elizabeth II is not a German - she was born and raised in Britain

All of the above monarchs spoke English, regarded British customs and were Anglicans.

POINT 3:
The reason people think the Royal Family are Germans:
George I was German as he was born and raised in Hanover - he spoke little English
George II was German also.
Albert Saxe Coburg Gotha was German but he was a consort and his nationality has nothing to do with that of his children.

POINT 4
If you use the old republican approach you will soon discover that as well as being German, the Queen is:
French
Welsh
Scottish
Spanish
English
Dutch

Such an idea is preposterous.

POINT 1: BRITAIN'S POLICY IS IF YOU ARE BORN IN THE COUNTRY, YOU ARE A BRITISH CITIZEN. THIS IS A CRUCIAL POINT. THIS HAS BEEN THE STANDARD FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND REMAINS THE STANDARD TODAY.

Really? You might want to tell that to the Home Office in order to stop them deporting the children of asylum seekers that are born here. It isn't that simple, you have to be the child of either a British Citizen or someone settled here. As a matter of fact until very recently, the last year or so, Ireland did have a policy whereby if you were born in the 26 counties regardless of your parents' nationality or how long they had been there, you could automatically receive Irish citizenship.

Edit: Here we go, from the horse's mouth:

5. Will a child who is born in the United Kingdom from 1 January 1983 be a British citizen?


The child will be a British citizen if one of his or her parents (see Note 4) is a British citizen at the time of the birth. It does not matter how the parent concerned became a British citizen. If neither parent is a British citizen, the child will still be a British citizen if one of his or her parents is settled here (see Note 5) at the time of the birth. If neither of the child's parents is a British citizen and neither is settled in the United Kingdom, then the child will not be a British citizen when he or she is born.

http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/en/home/applying/british_nationality/advice_about_nationality/bn1_-_british_citizenship.html?

Edit 2:
To clarify what 'settled' means here:

The definition of "settled" is that the parent is free from Immigration control and has been granted the right to enter, or remain in, the UK for an indefinite period.

http://www.britainincanada.org/Passport/eligible.htm

Edit 3:
All of the above monarchs spoke British, regarded British customs and were Anglicans.

What is this language 'British' of which you speak?

Actually, had he told people he was simply going as Edward VIII, I'd give him points.

POINT 1: BRITAIN'S POLICY IS IF YOU ARE BORN IN THE COUNTRY, YOU ARE A BRITISH CITIZEN. THIS IS A CRUCIAL POINT. THIS HAS BEEN THE STANDARD FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND REMAINS THE STANDARD TODAY.

Actually, since you Britishers have a Queen as your head of state, technically you are "subjects" not citizens.

Actually, since you Britishers have a Queen as your head of state, technically you are "subjects" not citizens.

Well, actually, we use the two terms to describe ourselves, and you can't argue with this usage as it is a long established one. The two, anyway, aren't mutually exclusive - we are members of a state and as such are citizens, but we are also nominally ruled by a monarch, and so like it or not, are subjects.

Really? You might want to tell that to the Home Office in order to stop them deporting the children of asylum seekers that are born here. It isn't that simple, you have to be the child of either a British Citizen or someone settled here. As a matter of fact until very recently, the last year or so, Ireland did have a policy whereby if you were born in the 26 counties regardless of your parents' nationality or how long they had been there, you could automatically receive Irish citizenship.

Edit: Here we go, from the horse's mouth:

5. Will a child who is born in the United Kingdom from 1 January 1983 be a British citizen?


The child will be a British citizen if one of his or her parents (see Note 4) is a British citizen at the time of the birth. It does not matter how the parent concerned became a British citizen. If neither parent is a British citizen, the child will still be a British citizen if one of his or her parents is settled here (see Note 5) at the time of the birth. If neither of the child's parents is a British citizen and neither is settled in the United Kingdom, then the child will not be a British citizen when he or she is born.

http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/en/home/applying/british_nationality/advice_about_nationality/bn1_-_british_citizenship.html?

Edit 2:
To clarify what 'settled' means here:

The definition of "settled" is that the parent is free from Immigration control and has been granted the right to enter, or remain in, the UK for an indefinite period.

http://www.britainincanada.org/Passport/eligible.htm

Edit 3:


What is this language 'British' of which you speak?

Actually, since you Britishers have a Queen as your head of state, technically you are "subjects" not citizens.

The attack of the nit pickers who cannot think of effective arguments to counter me. Soon they will be telling me about spelling/grammar mistakes and then claim they won the argument. No wonder the republican movement in this country has never taken off when this is the quality of their debating

The attack of the nit pickers who cannot think of effective arguments to counter me.

Correcting a blatant falsehood is hardly nit picking.

No wonder the republican movement in this country has never taken off when this is the quality of their debating

At what point did I identify myself with the republican movement?

Oh Lord Almighty...

He wore a COSTUME to a costume party. I've known people to go to costume parties dressed as Nazis, Priests, Nuns, criminals, etc. Does that mean they practice National Socialism, are Catholic clergy or convicts? No.

It might have been in poor taste for him, however it has absolutely nothing to do with these fools trying to claim he's a Nazi. Though I'm sure some would just have shouted that he was anti-African or something if he dressed in a colonial era uniform.

And yes, I am one of the Americans who are strong Monarchists.

You know I get very sick of republican idiots (the two terms are virtually synonymous ) saying as an argument "Why should we keep the Queen, she's German!" A bit of lesson on history and British immigration me thinks.

POINT 1: BRITAIN'S POLICY IS IF YOU ARE BORN IN THE COUNTRY, YOU ARE A BRITISH CITIZEN. THIS IS A CRUCIAL POINT. THIS HAS BEEN THE STANDARD FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND REMAINS THE STANDARD TODAY.

With that in mind lets continue:

POINT 2:
George III was not German - he was born and raised in Britain
George IV was not German - he was born and raised in Britain
William IV was not German - he was born and raised in Britain
Victoria was not German - she was born and raised in Britain although she did marry a German.
Edward VII was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain. We do not judge the nationality of the heir by the nationality of the lesser parent. If that were so Charles would be Greek.
George V was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain
Edward VIII was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain
George VI was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain
Elizabeth II is not a German - she was born and raised in Britain

All of the above monarchs spoke English, regarded British customs and were Anglicans.

POINT 3:
The reason people think the Royal Family are Germans:
George I was German as he was born and raised in Hanover - he spoke little English
George II was German also.
Albert Saxe Coburg Gotha was German but he was a consort and his nationality has nothing to do with that of his children.

POINT 4
If you use the old republican approach you will soon discover that as well as being German, the Queen is:
French
Welsh
Scottish
Spanish
English
Dutch

Such an idea is preposterous.



did I mention Georgie the orange?

Did I mention they weren't brits, just their recent blood lines?

I said Phil was born in Greece, he was born a prussian and his family name was von battanburg

I also mentioned the family name.

as for british blood, if your in that frame of mind then everyone born in england, be they of jamaican, african, latin, subcontinental, asian etc is english, then so be it, if your happy with that the glad to accept that lizzy is a brit.

however SOME brits claim that those from pakistan, africa, india etc are foreigners even though many are 2nd 3rd, 4th and 5 generation and have been longer in there than say the jews have been in israel.

born in britain DOES NOT MEAN you are british citizen, but if you like that definition, then its fine.

cheers to you grumpy.

as for harry the dope fiends actions, I'm sure if some celebrities dressed up as OBL on the anniversary of s11 that that would be equally amusing :eek:

and finally the youngest of lizzy lads has the surname mountbattan, and not windsor, which chuck and andy do. interesting point there.

victoria was married and despite being queenie and albert being a prince and NOT king the kiddies were saxe coburg gothe's (I am not sure if that was vickies name pre marraige)

anyway they were cousins (obviously kissing cousins).

as for DNA, they carry 50% DNA from daddy as well as mummy so there really isn't a lesser royal when it comes to parenting.

as for royals, I think they are all a bunch of tossers so there

It might have been in poor taste for him, however it has absolutely nothing to do with these fools trying to claim he's a Nazi.

Has anyone on this thread actually claim taht he is a Nazi?

And yes, I am one of the Americans who are strong Monarchists.

Pro-monarchy in general, or just pro the British monarchy?

He's what, twenty years old? For his entire life he has been hounded by the media, and it is NOT his choice. He was born into it. When he tries to do something like a lot of us have done, be it drinking yourself stupid, smoking cannabis, having a laugh, etc, it's suddenly a massive event and he's a terrible person.

I don't have a problem with any of that. I agree, let the boy have fun. I do the same :p

But i'm 18- and I still think wearing a Nazi uniform *anywhere* is absolutely disgusting.

Okay, I am getting really sick of this. It was a costume party. He wore a costume. People wear costumes to costume parties, and it doesn't mean that they actually want to be whatever they went as. Are people who go as axe murderes for Halloween are in support of axe murderers? No. And if the press made a big deal out of some kid going to party as an axe murderer, I should hope that the majority of people reading about it would consider that ridiculous (I certainly would.)

So, the problem here is that he's royal. People think it's okay to gossip about everything someone does, so long as they were born into the royal family. It's not just this; I have been annoyed again and again with People Magazine and others spreading everything William or Harry does all over the place. They didn't decide to be royal, they were born into it. Show some compassion.

Harry did something that offended people. Oops. Everyone does it every now and then, generally because they didn't foresee people taking it the wrong way. I'm sure that was all it was in Harry's case; I can't imagine him thinking "What can I do to really offend a lot of people?" and then going ahead with it. He maybe should have realized that people are pathetic enough to make a huge deal about it, but then again maybe he's sick of not doing things just because people will make a huge deal about it. If I had been in his situation, here's what I would have said: "I didn't mean to offend anyone, and I'm sorry that I did, but if the press wasn't so determined to put everything I do on national television no one would have been offended. Now leave me the hell alone." Of course, if he said that everyone would be talking about how *gasp* Harry said a naughty word, which is SO unusual for people his age!

However, I can't apologize for his costume or say anything else that can only come from him. I can however say: Leave him, and his brother and the rest of their family, the hell alone.

You know I get very sick of republican idiots (the two terms are virtually synonymous ) saying as an argument "Why should we keep the Queen, she's German!" A bit of lesson on history and British immigration me thinks.

POINT 1: BRITAIN'S POLICY IS IF YOU ARE BORN IN THE COUNTRY, YOU ARE A BRITISH CITIZEN. THIS IS A CRUCIAL POINT. THIS HAS BEEN THE STANDARD FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND REMAINS THE STANDARD TODAY.

With that in mind lets continue:

POINT 2:
George III was not German - he was born and raised in Britain
George IV was not German - he was born and raised in Britain
William IV was not German - he was born and raised in Britain
Victoria was not German - she was born and raised in Britain although she did marry a German.
Edward VII was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain. We do not judge the nationality of the heir by the nationality of the lesser parent. If that were so Charles would be Greek.
George V was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain
Edward VIII was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain
George VI was not a German - he was born and raised in Britain
Elizabeth II is not a German - she was born and raised in Britain

All of the above monarchs spoke English, regarded British customs and were Anglicans.

POINT 3:
The reason people think the Royal Family are Germans:
George I was German as he was born and raised in Hanover - he spoke little English
George II was German also.
Albert Saxe Coburg Gotha was German but he was a consort and his nationality has nothing to do with that of his children.

POINT 4
If you use the old republican approach you will soon discover that as well as being German, the Queen is:
French
Welsh
Scottish
Spanish
English
Dutch

Such an idea is preposterous.



Hey like I said before, my family ran to America one step ahead the English noose, make me King and I'll split some royal loot with you.

I'll tell you what, because I like the cut of your jib I'll give you a Georgian Silver tea set for you support, (The Queen's got loads). Come on, it's a lot more than you'll get from the Queen. :D

phil the greek and his uncle were von battanburgs.



Actually Phil the greek is a schleswig holstien. He later took the MountBatten (BattenBurg) name to diguise his lower middle class german origins.

I'm glad to see that the Royal family is continuing the tradition of secret Hitlerite leanings however.

And as for all this, "for heavens sake it was just a costume" crap, how many of you had sympathy for the girl with the confederate falg prom dress. (And she didn't even pay for it with tax payers money).

I say we should go back to the old system, where royals are beaten like gongs for the first twenty five years, and never exposed to any form of higher education. At least under that system they knew how to comport themselves; or at least not get caught.

Actually Phil the greek is a schleswig holstien. He later took the MountBatten (BattenBurg) name to diguise his lower middle class german origins.

I'm glad to see that the Royal family is continuing the tradition of secret Hitlerite leanings however.

And as for all this, "for heavens sake it was just a costume" crap, how many of you had sympathy for the girl with the confederate falg prom dress. (And she didn't even pay for it with tax payers money).

I say we should go back to the old system, where royals are beaten like gongs for the first twenty five years, and never exposed to any form of higher education. At least under that system they knew how to comport themselves; or at least not get caught.


Oh but this was a Royal, they are so much better than we mere peasants.

You know every American that craps their pants over the British royal family should be watched. Then they should be tarred and feathered like we did in the Revolution.

There was a time when Americans wouldn't bow before a foreign potentates on principle. I think there's a law somewhere that specifies that we aren't suppose to.

Oh but this was a Royal, they are so much better than we mere peasants.

You know every American that craps their pants over the British royal family should be watched. Then they should be tarred and feathered like we did in the Revolution.

There was a time when Americans wouldn't bow before a foreign potentates on principle. I think there's a law somewhere that specifies that we aren't suppose to.

I agree wholeheartedly. I am suspicious of anyone who sniffs the Royal Rectum.

That entire family is a bunch of inbred rectum monkeys, made all the worse by thier pathetic attempts at social concious and efforts to be "cool." At least the old timey Royals like Edward I carried themselves appropriatley for the office.

And the worst of the bunch was that shriveled horse faced harlot Diana Spencer. Frankly her campaign against landmines pissed me off no end. After all it's not like she would ever be asked to go fight a war without the benefit of vital ordinance. (Well that, and her pro-islamo fascist leanings).

I say to the British people, let this be an object lesson in why cousins shouldn't marry for twenty consective generations.

The best thing the brits could do, if they must keep the royals, is throw it open again like they did in 1066, and hope another William I shows up.

Dude it's the British who are out of touch with reality. The royal family is a display like a fancy doll house. A unreal perfect little world you've created and placed your dolls in. I'm not saying that the royals didn't encourage this perception to hold on against reason, but the UK is the owner of the doll house.


Too true. Americans must be incredibly thankful they don't live in a country where someone can become head of state without winning a majority of votes on the back of who their father is...

Seeing as how we are paying their wages, I think we have a right to comment, at the very least.

How, exactly, do we pay their wages? And how did this arrangement come about?


I want to finish with a few short statements:

Was Prince Harry's choice of costume stupid? Yes
Was it in bad taste? Yes
Was the theme of the party stupid? Yes
Was it in bad taste? Yes
Is it any of our goddamn business? No

Okay, I am getting really sick of this. It was a costume party. He wore a costume. People wear costumes to costume parties, and it doesn't mean that they actually want to be whatever they went as. Are people who go as axe murderes for Halloween are in support of axe murderers? No. And if the press made a big deal out of some kid going to party as an axe murderer, I should hope that the majority of people reading about it would consider that ridiculous (I certainly would.)

So, the problem here is that he's royal. People think it's okay to gossip about everything someone does, so long as they were born into the royal family. It's not just this; I have been annoyed again and again with People Magazine and others spreading everything William or Harry does all over the place. They didn't decide to be royal, they were born into it. Show some compassion.

Harry did something that offended people. Oops. Everyone does it every now and then, generally because they didn't foresee people taking it the wrong way. I'm sure that was all it was in Harry's case; I can't imagine him thinking "What can I do to really offend a lot of people?" and then going ahead with it. He maybe should have realized that people are pathetic enough to make a huge deal about it, but then again maybe he's sick of not doing things just because people will make a huge deal about it. If I had been in his situation, here's what I would have said: "I didn't mean to offend anyone, and I'm sorry that I did, but if the press wasn't so determined to put everything I do on national television no one would have been offended. Now leave me the hell alone." Of course, if he said that everyone would be talking about how *gasp* Harry said a naughty word, which is SO unusual for people his age!

However, I can't apologize for his costume or say anything else that can only come from him. I can however say: Leave him, and his brother and the rest of their family, the hell alone.


sure, next time I'll wear a OBL outfit i go to a fancy dress party on september 11 or around that date, hopefully it will on the say 10th, 20th, 30th anniversary of that day.

I am sure everyone will realise its just an outfit and not a statement :rolleyes:

the reality is I would never do anything so distateful or disgusting, but the jews feel the sameway about hitler and the nazi's as americans feel about OBL.

OBL and his freak show killed 3000 americans, the Nazi's killed maybe 6 million jews, or 40 times the number killed by the tsunami and started a war that resulted in the deaths of 10s of millions, and many more displaced.

the brit newspapers are still include a ww2 story every second day, they didn't stop rationing till the 50s, the nazi's massacred women and children without mercy who were jewish.

the Nazi's were amongst the worste scum in the history of the world

How, exactly, do we pay their wages? And how did this arrangement come about?


Is it any of our goddamn business? No

two issues. the brits do pay the queenies wages.

she gets a stipend from the govt and its distributed to the royals dukes etc and the queenie and her lads get to keep a bit as well.

Also they don't pay any taxes and haven't since the early 20th century when they were massively in debt, the govt bailed them out.

they also get revenue from their many investments, tax free, on top of the stipends and allowances.

Imagine how rich you'd be if the govt gave you and all your family 250 million per annum and allowed you to invest it and earn revenue tax free, for say 100 years?

Is it any of our business? not in aus or the Us perhaps, but to the brits, I think they have a right to be peed off that their tax payers money is going to pay for parties and outfits for these tossers, and their accomodation, and their butlers and retainers, and they don't pay any tax.

they are all filthy rich, except for the morons who gambled away or pissed their dosh away, and thats a few of them.

so the brits do have a right to know where their money is going.

as for us aussies, the queen can constitutionally cancel our parliament and appoint a government until another election can occur.

this has happened once in the state government of NSW in the 20s, when the state premier wanted to tax english landholders the same rate as australian landholders, the governor of NSW got written approval from the monarch to sack the government. They eventually did bring the law in.

this happened in 1975 again when the governor General sough approval from Lizzy to sack the prime minister gough whitlam and appoint govt till the next election.

even Malcolm Fraser who was the appointed govt leader said in the 1990s that it was morally wrong and campaigned for constitutional change so it could never happen again.

two issues. the brits do pay the queenies wages.

she gets a stipend from the govt and its distributed to the royals dukes etc and the queenie and her lads get to keep a bit as well.

Also they don't pay any taxes and haven't since the early 20th century when they were massively in debt, the govt bailed them out.

they also get revenue from their many investments, tax free, on top of the stipends and allowances.

Imagine how rich you'd be if the govt gave you and all your family 250 million per annum and allowed you to invest it and earn revenue tax free, for say 100 years?

Is it any of our business? not in aus or the Us perhaps, but to the brits, I think they have a right to be peed off that their tax payers money is going to pay for parties and outfits for these tossers, and their accomodation, and their butlers and retainers, and they don't pay any tax.

they are all filthy rich, except for the morons who gambled away or pissed their dosh away, and thats a few of them.

so the brits do have a right to know where their money is going.


Sorry, but you haven't answered my question, how exactly do UK citizens pay the monarch's wages?

More importantly however, you need to also answer the question of how this arrangement came about.

When you answer both those questions you'll realise why much of what you said above is innacurate.

美国人 是 二百五

Americans are 205? What does that mean?

Sorry, but you haven't answered my question, how exactly do UK citizens pay the monarch's wages?

More importantly however, you need to also answer the question of how this arrangement came about.

When you answer both those questions you'll realise why much of what you said above is innacurate.

http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page128.asp

The name Saxe-Coburg-Gotha came to the British Royal Family in 1840 with the marriage of Queen Victoria to Prince Albert, son of Ernst, Duke of Saxe-Coburg & Gotha. Queen Victoria herself remained a member of the House of Hanover.
The only British monarch of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha was King Edward VII, who reigned for nine years at the beginning of the modern age in the early years of the twentieth century. King George V replaced the German-sounding title with that of Windsor during the First World War. The name Saxe-Coburg-Gotha survived in other European monarchies, including the current Belgian Royal Family and the former monarchies of Portugal and Bulgaria.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1974678.stm

don't pay taxes like normal folks

also the civil lists, subsidised civil servants, access to free accomdation, tax free status, etc, and the annual stipend from taxpayers funds mean the british royals get a free leg up, and have done for nearly 100 years.

tax the buggers, and treat them like a normal business.

I think you'll realise that my answers are correct and my facts are correct.

The problem with republicans is they have no idea of grandeur or glory. Everything in their lives has to be sterile and all they think about is how efficient things are. The fact that the Royal Family are still much loved by the people of Britain doesn't matter to them: love is not a concept they can get their socialist hearts to understand. To them if the Queen costs money (a tiny amount per household) then she should go and then they can place Fuher Blair as the leader. Sickening.
Not everything in life is facts and figures. Traditions are just as important. Britain needs a monarchy to distinguish it from the hundreds of two bit republics - it makes us special and it shows a great deal of our history. It shows that the British people do not need to bloodily dispose of their Royal Family like the Russians or the French - the British are renouned for their diplomacy and tact and that is what the Royal Family is a result of.

Oh and I think Harry is an idiot. Silly fool is just feeding ammunition to republicans who will jump on anything in order to subvert public opinion. You can imagine a republican paper:
"QUEEN WEARS ODD SOCKS - OFF WITH HER HEAD"
"PHILLIP SAYS BUGGER - SHOOT THE SWEARING BASTARD"
"WILLIAM HELPS CHILDREN WITH AIDS - THE THICK SHIT"

Etc

The problem with republicans is they have no idea of grandeur or glory. Everything in their lives has to be sterile and all they think about is how efficient things are. The fact that the Royal Family are still much loved by the people of Britain doesn't matter to them: love is not a concept they can get their socialist hearts to understand. To them if the Queen costs money (a tiny amount per household) then she should go and then they can place Fuher Blair as the leader. Sickening.
Not everything in life is facts and figures. Traditions are just as important. Britain needs a monarchy to distinguish it from the hundreds of two bit republics - it makes us special and it shows a great deal of our history. It shows that the British people do not need to bloodily dispose of their Royal Family like the Russians or the French - the British are renouned for their diplomacy and tact and that is what the Royal Family is a result of.

Oh and I think Harry is an idiot. Silly fool is just feeding ammunition to republicans who will jump on anything in order to subvert public opinion. You can imagine a republican paper:
"QUEEN WEARS ODD SOCKS - OFF WITH HER HEAD"
"PHILLIP SAYS BUGGER - SHOOT THE SWEARING BASTARD"
"WILLIAM HELPS CHILDREN WITH AIDS - THE THICK SHIT"

Etc

whose a socialist? I am what you might call a dirty filthy capitalist pig dog :D

I don't mind the royals, I just wish the prats would be pay back taxes and not get a handout from the govt.

Queenie, even when you take out her 'crown jewels' is worth about 6 billion (queen Beatrix is estimated worth around 35 billion!!!!!!, still gets handouts and doesn't pay tax like the brit queen).

as for the pomp, thats fine, then they should be considered public property and if the media lambast them, then they have to quit whining.

Brits can keep their queenie if they really want, no skin, but I think brits who want accountability from their subsidised house pets should get it.

cheers

He's not the Fuhreur, he's just a naughty boy.

The problem with republicans is they have no idea of grandeur or glory. Everything in their lives has to be sterile and all they think about is how efficient things are. The fact that the Royal Family are still much loved by the people of Britain doesn't matter to them: love is not a concept they can get their socialist hearts to understand. To them if the Queen costs money (a tiny amount per household) then she should go and then they can place Fuher Blair as the leader. Sickening.
Not everything in life is facts and figures. Traditions are just as important. Britain needs a monarchy to distinguish it from the hundreds of two bit republics - it makes us special and it shows a great deal of our history. It shows that the British people do not need to bloodily dispose of their Royal Family like the Russians or the French - the British are renouned for their diplomacy and tact and that is what the Royal Family is a result of.

Oh and I think Harry is an idiot. Silly fool is just feeding ammunition to republicans who will jump on anything in order to subvert public opinion. You can imagine a republican paper:
"QUEEN WEARS ODD SOCKS - OFF WITH HER HEAD"
"PHILLIP SAYS BUGGER - SHOOT THE SWEARING BASTARD"
"WILLIAM HELPS CHILDREN WITH AIDS - THE THICK SHIT"

Etc
I liked the headlines at the end!
:p
The one thing I have a problem with is the higlighted bit. Republicans are about as far from socialist as you can get, in terms of basic ideals.

:confused: evil uniforms and costumes have always been worn at parties -- so why the fuss

Feh, I don't find it offensive at all. It is a coustume. Everyone should stop being so freaking sensitive.

i agree

i never realized how many british ppl hate the royals. not so much press about that here in the US.

relli? im an aussie we knew.

I liked the headlines at the end!
:p
The one thing I have a problem with is the higlighted bit. Republicans are about as far from socialist as you can get, in terms of basic ideals.
Thats Republicans. He's talking about republicans.

(one is a political party and the other wants to abolish the royal family and create a republic)

I have a jumper with the Finnish flag on it. When I wear it, I don't magically become Finnish do I? No, I'm still a bitter Monarchist Scot.

yeah my brother has a cambodian t-shirt but i dont thnk we hav ani cambodian roots. so ur a scot... stingy one?(i love all the stereotypical images of scottish people) my grandma on my mums sides scottish.

sure, next time I'll wear a OBL outfit i go to a fancy dress party on september 11 or around that date, hopefully it will on the say 10th, 20th, 30th anniversary of that day.

I am sure everyone will realise its just an outfit and not a statement :rolleyes:

the reality is I would never do anything so distateful or disgusting, but the jews feel the sameway about hitler and the nazi's as americans feel about OBL.

OBL and his freak show killed 3000 americans, the Nazi's killed maybe 6 million jews, or 40 times the number killed by the tsunami and started a war that resulted in the deaths of 10s of millions, and many more displaced.

the brit newspapers are still include a ww2 story every second day, they didn't stop rationing till the 50s, the nazi's massacred women and children without mercy who were jewish.

the Nazi's were amongst the worste scum in the history of the world

A) I would not be offended by that.
B) You, unlike Harry, have the chance to go to said parties without the media following you. Therefore, you have the chance to wear a costume to a party with a particular group of people who you know won't be offended. Harry doesn't have that opportunity, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to be a little incorrect now and then like the rest of us.
C) What precisely would you wear as a costume? I bet the majority of them could offend people.
D) Yeah, Nazis were bad. I never said they weren't, nor did Harry.

Thats Republicans. He's talking about republicans.

(one is a political party and the other wants to abolish the royal family and create a republic)

While we're at it. we should probably distinguish between (American) Republicans, (Irish) Republicans and republicans. They being: a political party, a group wanting a unified Ireland and a group wanting rid of the queen...

Too true. Americans must be incredibly thankful they don't live in a country where someone can become head of state without winning a majority of votes on the back of who their father is...



How, exactly, do we pay their wages? And how did this arrangement come about?


I want to finish with a few short statements:

Was Prince Harry's choice of costume stupid? Yes
Was it in bad taste? Yes
Was the theme of the party stupid? Yes
Was it in bad taste? Yes
Is it any of our goddamn business? No


The difference is the bastard is out in four years and will never darken our doors again. Your stuck with the royals for life baby. We'll wad GW up and toss his ass in the garbage can of history, you'll be debating William's illegitimate child or Harry's drunken fight over his illegitimate child.

Do I care? Well not really, but I love winding you Brits up over it. :p

It's a hoot! Even your republicans can't help fall, (even just a little) into the royals game, and God help the rest of you.

don't pay taxes like normal folks

also the civil lists, subsidised civil servants, access to free accomdation, tax free status, etc, and the annual stipend from taxpayers funds mean the british royals get a free leg up, and have done for nearly 100 years.

tax the buggers, and treat them like a normal business.

I think you'll realise that my answers are correct and my facts are correct.

OK, so you've got the Civil list which, it is true, is how we pay the royal family's wages. Now, what I meant in my original question (sorry if it wasn't clear) was how did the arrangement of the civil list come about?

The difference is the bastard is out in four years and will never darken our doors again. Your stuck with the royals for life baby. We'll wad GW up and toss his ass in the garbage can of history, you'll be debating William's illegitimate child or Harry's drunken fight over his illegitimate child.

No, difference is you actually elected a retard to be your head of state, we got stuck with one as consort to our head of state through marriage. And our HoS can't decide to invade middle eastern countries on a whimsy.

Do I care? Well not really, but I love winding you Brits up over it. :p

Don't flatter yourself, sweetie.

It's a hoot! Even your republicans can't help fall, (even just a little) into the royals game, and God help the rest of you.

Sorry, but by electing Bush as president Americans have forfeited the right to condexcend about any other Western nation's political system for the next 4 years. When you'll quite probably elect another Clinton. Which country has a problem with nepotism, again?

Americans are 205? What does that mean?

It's actually Americans are 250 (Chinese numbering convention is a bit different). And, erm, I'm not telling. ;)

What do you expect from a bunch of Englishmen?
I mean its not the first time the English have shocked the world with their unfeeling callousness. REMEMBER 1916!

We're quite evil us Englishmen. Our sneers, our twisted humour, our roles as bad men in hollywood films.

Yes....evil.

Englishmen certainly are callous, I mean all you have to do is look at Abu Ghraib.......oops. That was Americans, was it not?

Fallujah shooting injured unarmed Iraqis....damn English! Oh no......Americans too.

Ho hum.

REMEMBER 2004!

BTW, that is not even a uniform. It's just a white shirt (not even brown) with an armband (that in Nazi Germany was used only on dress uniforms, not in combat like Hollywood likes to show) and some epaulettes on the collar. One would think a Royal would at least do his faux-pas right.....

I am part German and I will say this...
The Jewish people, the English and any other people take this to far!
What is wrong with wearing a Nazi Officers uniform to a DRESS PARTY?
The fact is this, the majority of Jews today did not experiance the camps so for you to talk about this as it really affects you is wrong, I understand that some of you have family who were there but this has nothing to with that.
The English fought the Nazis in WWII and today after all the death people should take a lighter side to it.
I have nothing agains Jews or the English or any people for that matter, I do not hate these people but it makes me angry that you do not see what uniform he was in. It was an Africa Cor uniform the same group Erwin Rommel commanded and he was one of the best commanders in that war. If you talk to vetterans of the war no matter what the nationality is they will say that he was a great man and he was, if they do not then they still have a grudge and are weak if they can not reconize the characher of Rommel.
He did not like Hitler! but he was a soldier and a patriot of Germany, what would you have done in his footsteps?
The things that happend in that war are very sad and a shame on all but we must get past this.
I understand that he is a prince of England and should be held to a higher standard but he is a boy and let him have some fun out of life.
Wearing one uniform and he is marked, do you have any idea what he has done for the people of Africa?
For those of you planning on attacking me by calling me anti this and anti that let me be VERY CLEAR!

I do not hate any people.

OK, so you've got the Civil list which, it is true, is how we pay the royal family's wages. Now, what I meant in my original question (sorry if it wasn't clear) was how did the arrangement of the civil list come about?



No, difference is you actually elected a retard to be your head of state, we got stuck with one as consort to our head of state through marriage. And our HoS can't decide to invade middle eastern countries on a whimsy.



Don't flatter yourself, sweetie.



Sorry, but by electing Bush as president Americans have forfeited the right to condexcend about any other Western nation's political system for the next 4 years. When you'll quite probably elect another Clinton. Which country has a problem with nepotism, again?


Oh, like it was a fair election. :rolleyes:

We would have contested the election, but we'd rather have power for the rest of the century after Bush pilots America into the ground, and the Republican Party self implodes.

Now true you did get stuck with your HOS, but you are a democracy. The only reason you have Royals after Cromwell is through an act of Parliament. You can in fact get rid of them at anytime.

However if you feel the need to have a Monarch, might I suggest the one of the millions of the Royal Stewart Clan and all it's Septs in exile. If there is one thing we've done in the colonies it's to breed like rabbits. We have enough current stock to supply you with a new Monarch every week forever.

Oh yes, and I do flatter myself. If history had worked out somewhat differently you might be debating what my idiot son wore to a costume party. :D

It was an Africa Cor uniform the same group Erwin Rommel commanded and he was one of the best commanders in that war. If you talk to vetterans of the war no matter what the nationality is they will say that he was a great man and he was, if they do not then they still have a grudge and are weak if they can not reconize the characher of Rommel.
He did not like Hitler! but he was a soldier and a patriot of Germany, what would you have done in his footsteps?

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but Rommel was never a member of the Nazi party (this I know for sure), instead he was a proffesional soldier, and as such would never have worn a swastika armband, no?

I too am part german and don't hate any people. Any way America says that the germans are evil since kindergarten but lets look at the rest of The Western World

America:Do Japenese internment camps mean anything? Don't forget the Native America Genocide

Spain:Genocides:Jews,Moors,dutch and Cubans

England:Catholic Kings and Catholics. :mad: I'm catholic.

Italy:Roman Empire:Goths (German "Barbarians" the people who find entertainment of killing other people are "Civilized" and nomads are not hmm)
Carthrage (Africa after its defeat)

France: People against the revelotion or the war of the First colation. Hugonauts.

Russia: Did anyone hear of Stalin. Lenin "What ever you do don't put Stalin in power." Russians put him into power and lets say it was worse then 16 million casualties.

And the rest of europe says that only Germany does wrong.

Yes true. But many of his unit did and they were all part of Rommel's Africa Cor

I too am part german and don't hate any people. Any way America says that the germans are evil since kindergarten but lets look at the rest of The Western World

America:Do Japenese internment camps mean anything? Don't forget the Native America Genocide

Spain:Genocides:Jews,Moors,dutch and Cubans

England:Catholic Kings and Catholics. :mad: I'm catholic. Me too.


Italy:Roman Empire:Goths (German "Barbarians" the people who find entertainment of killing other people are "Civilized" and nomads are not hmm)
Carthrage (Africa after its defeat)

France: People against the revelotion or the war of the First colation. Hugonauts.

Russia: Did anyone hear of Stalin. Lenin "What ever you do don't put Stalin in power." Russians put him into power and lets say it was worse then 16 million casualties.

And the rest of europe says that only Germany does wrong.


All of what you said is true.

Yes true. But many of his unit did and they were all part of Rommel's Africa Cor

My point was that you are trying to use Rommel, a widely admired soldier, indeed gentleman, to justify the wearing of the swastika, while he himself would never have sported it.

Oh, like it was a fair election. :rolleyes:

We would have contested the election, but we'd rather have power for the rest of the century after Bush pilots America into the ground, and the Republican Party self implodes.

Now true you did get stuck with your HOS, but you are a democracy. The only reason you have Royals after Cromwell is through an act of Parliament. You can in fact get rid of them at anytime.

However if you feel the need to have a Monarch, might I suggest the one of the millions of the Royal Stewart Clan and all it's Septs in exile. If there is one thing we've done in the colonies it's to breed like rabbits. We have enough current stock to supply you with a new Monarch every week forever.

Oh yes, and I do flatter myself. If history had worked out somewhat differently you might be debating what my idiot son wore to a costume party. :D

I think you're missing the point somewhat. We chose to have a monarchy, yes. We also chose to give them precisely zero real power. This means we get stuck with idiots like Philip from time to time. It also means they can't actually do any real damage.

The US, on the other hand, elected a Christian fundamentalist retard on no less than 2 separate occasions. Even if the election was rigged, and there's no strong evidence to suggest the last one was, then it shouldn't even have been close.

So all in all we're pretty OK with having to deal with the powerless offspring of powerless monarchs doing stupid things because it results in, erm, a brief upswing in sales of the Sun. You guys, on the other hand, have to deal with your powerful elected idiots (can I also bring Reagan and Ford into the discussion?) having their fingers over the nuclear button, praying every night that tomorrow isn't the day they mistake it for an M&M.

My point was that you are trying to use Rommel, a widely admired soldier, indeed gentleman, to justify the wearing of the swastika, while he himself would never have sported it.

I would never justify wearing the swastika.
I said many in his unit did wear it but Rommel and his unit fought well in Africa and that is what that uniform sibolizes.

I too am part german and don't hate any people. Any way America says that the germans are evil since kindergarten but lets look at the rest of The Western World

America:Do Japenese internment camps mean anything? Don't forget the Native America Genocide

Spain:Genocides:Jews,Moors,dutch and Cubans

England:Catholic Kings and Catholics. :mad: I'm catholic.

Italy:Roman Empire:Goths (German "Barbarians" the people who find entertainment of killing other people are "Civilized" and nomads are not hmm)
Carthrage (Africa after its defeat)

France: People against the revelotion or the war of the First colation. Hugonauts.

Russia: Did anyone hear of Stalin. Lenin "What ever you do don't put Stalin in power." Russians put him into power and lets say it was worse then 16 million casualties.

And the rest of europe says that only Germany does wrong.


You forgot the Turks and the Armenians.

I think what freaks people out about Germany is the cold blooded industrial efficiency of the Genocide, and the desire to do this all over the planet. The desired result was to make the earth occupied by only one massive blonde blue eyed race.

What people forget is that all undesirables were going to eventually be targeted, Jews where just the starting point. The Germans slaughtered millions of Western Russians civilians, lots of Poles, Slavs, and Hungarians, and were just starting the whole thing on the French when the war ended. If England would have been conquered the population would have been enslaved, sterilized, and eventually run through an industrial death mill when the German population was ready to colonize.

I'm not saying you should hang your head in shame, because a child is not responsible for the acts of his forefathers. By the same token you shouldn't dismiss this along with the other acts of inhumanity. Nazi Germany was weird. I mean black leather pants, whips, and chains kind of weird. It's no coincidence that so much of S&M paraphernalia has neo gothic Nazi design similarities.

You forgot the Turks and the Armenians.

I think what freaks people out about Germany is the cold blooded industrial efficiency of the Genocide, and the desire to do this all over the planet. The desired result was to make the earth occupied by only one massive blonde blue eyed race.

What people forget is that all undesirables were going to eventually be targeted, Jews where just the starting point. The Germans slaughtered millions of Western Russians civilians, lots of Poles, Slavs, and Hungarians, and were just starting the whole thing on the French when the war ended. If England would have been conquered the population would have been enslaved, sterilized, and eventually run through an industrial death mill when the German population was ready to colonize.

I'm not saying you should hang your head in shame, because a child is not responsible for the acts of his forefathers. By the same token you shouldn't dismiss this along with the other acts of inhumanity. Nazi Germany was weird. I mean black leather pants, whips, and chains kind of weird. It's no coincidence that so much of S&M paraphernalia has neo gothic Nazi design similarities.

I would never hang my head in shame. We know how well our forefathers fought and that is something the world does not see. We had heros too but they are not given the respect that they desirve because of the acts of few anti-semetics and the Nazi Party.

I think you're missing the point somewhat. We chose to have a monarchy, yes. We also chose to give them precisely zero real power. This means we get stuck with idiots like Philip from time to time. It also means they can't actually do any real damage.

The US, on the other hand, elected a Christian fundamentalist retard on no less than 2 separate occasions. Even if the election was rigged, and there's no strong evidence to suggest the last one was, then it shouldn't even have been close.

So all in all we're pretty OK with having to deal with the powerless offspring of powerless monarchs doing stupid things because it results in, erm, a brief upswing in sales of the Sun. You guys, on the other hand, have to deal with your powerful elected idiots (can I also bring Reagan and Ford into the discussion?) having their fingers over the nuclear button, praying every night that tomorrow isn't the day they mistake it for an M&M.



Let me let you in on a little secret we've learned in America, money is power.

You may have stripped your monarch of legal political power, but you have allowed her to become very rich. Right now Queen Elizabeth II rules The City, The Tories, and through BP, Shell, and The City owns New Labor. Your Empire may be a Common Wealth now, but Elizabeth II is every bit as powerful as Victoria within the UK.

When I lived in the UK the Royal family seemed to lack relevance in the modern world, but truthfully I did not see the forest for the trees. Only when you are outside of the UK can you see the enormous influence the Queen wields.

Might I also add that BP and Shell where part if the oil cabal that put G W Bush into power? Your Queen is far more powerful than you Brits have any idea of. Just because she allows you to mock her family in the media means she can't stop you doing it.

I have a great deal respect for your Queen. I can publicly muse about replacing her on the throne only because I'm absolutely no threat to her. If I were, there is an Army of her loyal retainers in Government and Industry who would be happy to take care of me for her. All she would have to say is "Who will rid me of the troublesome forum poster!", and the drunken knights fresh from the Iraqi crusade would be on their way.

It's not that I'm missing the point, it's just that your point is a collection of years of misconceptions from Star headlines. Your Queen is the most powerful woman in the world, and the next King will be one of the most powerful men.

I would never justify wearing the swastika.
I said many in his unit did wear it but Rommel and his unit fought well in Africa and that is what that uniform sibolizes.

What is wrong with wearing a Nazi Officers uniform to a DRESS PARTY?

So you believe that wearing the Africa Korps uniform would be acceptable, but wearing it with a swastika armband, as is the case here, wouldn't be justified?

[conspiracy snippage]
It's not that I'm missing the point, it's just that your point is a collection of years of misconceptions from Star headlines. Your Queen is the most powerful woman in the world, and the next King will be one of the most powerful men.

Not that I've ever read the Star in my life but I think even that rag would be a preferable news source over David Icke books, which is where you seem to be getting your opinions from. Or do you care to provide something resembling evidence about the Queen's dark, financial influence over the upper echelons of British society?

Not that I've ever read the Star in my life but I think even that rag would be a preferable news source over David Icke books, which is where you seem to be getting your opinions from. Or do you care to provide something resembling evidence about the Queen's dark, financial influence over the upper echelons of British society?

Never read Icke. We Americans are fairly obsessed with money and who has it. We like to keep track so we know where the hammer's going to fall, and who's doing the swinging.

Oh but I'm sure you're correct. She's just a poor old woman, easy prey for the odd tabloid press tomato. Oh yes how could you possibly go in for republican sentiment and oust them when obviously the press can make fun of them. It's not like they can have a troublesome family member slaughtered with impunity. :D

I would never hang my head in shame. We know how well our forefathers fought and that is something the world does not see. We had heros too but they are not given the respect that they desirve because of the acts of few anti-semetics and the Nazi Party.

Excuse me? You're selling that Nazis were a minority of the German population crap? Dude your people were all Nazis which is why we didn't flinch as we fire bombed the living shit out of your cities.

Your ancestors wanted to slaughter the rest of the human race. In Russia your Army slaughtered millions of civilians as they advanced. Oh they fought well, they were so noble. :rolleyes:

Your just lucky Germany folded before we finished the atomic bomb, or it would have ended up a radioactive sheet of fused glass.

Excuse me? You're selling that Nazis were a minority of the German population crap? Dude your people were all Nazis which is why we didn't flinch as we fire bombed the living shit out of your cities.

To say that all Germans in the early 40's were members of the Nazi party is as silly as saying that all Americans are Republicans

Your ancestors wanted to slaughter the rest of the human race. In Russia your Army slaughtered millions of civilians as they advanced. Oh they fought well, they were so noble. :rolleyes:

That was a long way away from Africa

Your just lucky Germany folded before we finished the atomic bomb, or it would have ended up a radioactive sheet of fused glass.

I find this a strange thing to brag about.

Excuse me? You're selling that Nazis were a minority of the German population crap? Dude your people were all Nazis which is why we didn't flinch as we fire bombed the living shit out of your cities.

Your ancestors wanted to slaughter the rest of the human race. In Russia your Army slaughtered millions of civilians as they advanced. Oh they fought well, they were so noble. :rolleyes:

Your just lucky Germany folded before we finished the atomic bomb, or it would have ended up a radioactive sheet of fused glass.

Whoa, dude. You really think all the German people were Nazis? You think it's in the blood or something?

Your method of thinking seems a bit... well, Nazi-like.

I find this a strange thing to brag about.
Yes. Rather odd, isn't it, for someone talking about how Nazi's are terrible.

http://www.republicgoldcoast.com/i/People%20Pics/002_Royal_Family_Harry_Hewett_Charles_ARM.JPG

came across this little ripper... ;)

http://www.republicgoldcoast.com/i/People%20Pics/002_Royal_Family_Harry_Hewett_Charles_ARM.JPG

came across this little ripper... ;)

Yeah, its highly likely that Harry is Hewitts son but to be honest, who cares? I personaly believe the Royals should be struck from the civil list if all they're going to do is make fools of themselves. All the money that is poured into them could be used to give ORDINARY PEOPLE a decent education (not the comprehensive crap that we have now). Yes i go to an private school but i wouldnt need to if we had a decent system. Both my parents were state educated so why shouldnt i be? Lack of money? Get rid of the need to pay the Royals and we wouldnt be short of cash to put into the NHS, Education and transport.

Yeah, its highly likely that Harry is Hewitts son but to be honest, who cares? I personaly believe the Royals should be struck from the civil list if all they're going to do is make fools of themselves. All the money that is poured into them could be used to give ORDINARY PEOPLE a decent education (not the comprehensive crap that we have now). Yes i go to an private school but i wouldnt need to if we had a decent system. Both my parents were state educated so why shouldnt i be? Lack of money? Get rid of the need to pay the Royals and we wouldnt be short of cash to put into the NHS, Education and transport.

really I don't, but the whole concept of born to rule with royal bloodlines meaning something, is a bit of joke, when after chuck carks it, its willy then harry next in line...

and we know bastards have 'inherited' in the past, and others by conquest.

We Americans are fairly obsessed with money and who has it.


That certainly comes as a revelation to the world as a whole.


On the subject of who is the father of Harry 'The Nazi', well it probably only adds credence to the nickname he has acquired: Harry The Bastard.

Apparently the people who he was hanging round with were all racists, but goodness, let us not be surprised, they are the upper class twits they are.


On the subject on whether all Germans were Nazi are not, I would say no, not all Germans were Nazis, and those that were not included Rommel, and many soldiers in the Wehrmacht, who were just fighting for Germany and not necessarily the Nazi Germany. Which can not be said for the SS.

But saying that, nobody should ever dismiss Nazism in Germany at that time as a minority belief. That, quite simply, is absurd. But so is saying every German was a Nazi.

First I would like to thank The State of It, Tempers and Conceptualists for the reply's they gave Ultra Cool People when I was offline. Thank you.

Excuse me? You're selling that Nazis were a minority of the German population crap? Dude your people were all Nazis which is why we didn't flinch as we fire bombed the living shit out of your cities.

Well you must look at it like this, my people did not have a choise of many political partys, Adolf Hitler had put a stop to it when the Nazi Party came to power. We had one political party and that was it.
To say that all the millions of my countrymen and women were Nazis is just not right.
Not all Germans were Nazi members and the majority of the people did not support the Nazi Party fully.
None of my people were members of the Nazi Party but were soldiers and officers in the infantry and Luftwaffe. None were killed in the war but the scares of the war are often more terrible for all.
Now when you say that your air forces did not flinch when they bombed German cities and civilians is just not true. You lost 20% of your strike capability alone because of the fear your air crews had for German forces and that is a well known fact that the United States has given out and it is supported by Robert S. McNamara who worked for the U.S. Army on this issue in the War under General Curtis Lemay.

Your ancestors wanted to slaughter the rest of the human race. In Russia your Army slaughtered millions of civilians as they advanced. Oh they fought well, they were so noble. :rolleyes:
Your just lucky Germany folded before we finished the atomic bomb, or it would have ended up a radioactive sheet of fused glass.

No that is not true, the people in power did want to kill many but not my ancestors and not the majority of the German people, Nazi members included.
It was kept from the people in general, many did not learn of it until after the war.
They fought well and hard, they were patriots and did not want the Russians, Americans, French and the English or any other nation to invade Germany, take it over and leave them in the same state as after the first war. The actions taken by the "allies" after the first war contibuted greatly to the out break of the second war but that is another issue.
I do not think that they would have bombed my country with nuclear weapons even if the war had gone on longer then it did.

Yes. Rather odd, isn't it, for someone talking about how Nazi's are terrible.

He is not talking about that. He's talking about the capability of the U.S. to strike a nation with nuclear weapons at that time.

He is not talking about that. He's talking about the capability of the U.S. to strike a nation with nuclear weapons at that time.
In one line out of the three. The first two sure seemed to have nothing to do with nuclear weaponry.

No in the first two he is not but that is not the point with what he said with the last one.
The last line alone is were he talks about that.
I do not really get your point, can you post you point?

You guys are funny. :D

No in the first two he is not but that is not the point with what he said with the last one.
The last line alone is were he talks about that.
I do not really get your point, can you post you point?
He said it would have been a good idea to nuke Germany into glass because they are Nazis. That sounds a bit Nazi-like, destroying everyone who isn't like you, whether or no they're actually what you say they are.

You guys are funny. :D

And you really need to read history before you make remarks like you have.

And you really need to read history before you make remarks like you have.


And you need to visit Auschwitz.

He said it would have been a good idea to nuke Germany into glass because they are Nazis- Posted by Ultra Cool People - Yes he did.

That sounds a bit Nazi-like- Posted by Tempers - Ment for Ultra Cool People

whether or no they're actually what you say they are. - What are you talking about? I'm missing something.

He said it would have been a good idea to nuke Germany into glass because they are Nazis. That sounds a bit Nazi-like, destroying everyone who isn't like you, whether or no they're actually what you say they are.


No, I said that Germany was lucky they folded before we developed the atomic bomb, and yes they were. The US and Britain felt no remorse about using fire bombing to reduce German Cities to smoldering piles of ruins. If we had atomic bombs we would have used them on Germany without a 2nd thought.

And you need to visit Auschwitz.

I advise you to never go to Germany if this is your attitude. You really think we do not understand the war that was fought on our own ground on our own continent by our own people? Grow up. We know what happend to the Jews.
If what you have posted on this thread is the extent of what you know of the war you really need to read a history book. Even more so if you take a firm stand as you have on the grounds of what you know.
Stay to what we were talking about.
Even American World War vetterans say that the Germans were not all Nazis and were superb soldiers.
You like dvd's I should think, if so take a lokk at Band of Brothers if you do not want to read and listen to your people who were there.

The US and Britain felt no remorse about using fire bombing to reduce German Cities to smoldering piles of ruins.

How about if we make a distinction here between Bomber Harris and everybody else in the UK?

No, I said that Germany was lucky they folded before we developed the atomic bomb, and yes they were. The US and Britain felt no remorse about using fire bombing to reduce German Cities to smoldering piles of ruins. If we had atomic bombs we would have used them on Germany without a 2nd thought.

Japan is an island and it is a long way from othe nations, Germany is next to the Nederlands, Polland, France etc. it would have effected them all and that is why I think you would never have used them. Your people knew what effect the bomb had before it was used to slaughter the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

North Island: still waiting for a response to this one:

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7952008&postcount=153

You were aware, weren't you that Harry was actually wearing a swastika, yes?

How about if we make a distinction here between Bomber Harris and everybody else in the UK?

Oh please, you're all going into historical revisionism.

After getting the living crap bombed out of England no one in the UK gave a rat's ass how hard Bomber Command hit Germany, except that they were not hitting hard enough.


And NI, everything Hitler wanted to accomplish was in Mien Kampf, which was required reading in Germany at the time. That load of crap about not knowing what was going on, is the same story we heard from Germans living in towns right next to Concentration Camps.

Oh please, you're all going into historical revisionism.

After getting the living crap bombed out of England no one in the UK gave a rat's ass how hard Bomber Command hit Germany, except that they were not hitting hard enough.

The existence of conscientious objectors in WWII shows that if anyone here is indulging in historical revisionism, it is yourself.

Yes it is fine to wear the Africa Cor uniform in my oppinion.
As to the swastica.
Well I do not think your prince knew what kind of uniform he was wearing (Africa Cor). He is an English prince and needs to be more cearfull.
He is not a Nazi and he was wearing it to a dress party and probably was meant to be a joke, so yes I do think it is fine wearing a swastica to a dress party.
Short-If a person is not a Nazi it is fine.
It was probably funny in his head, why cant people take a joke.

Yes it is fine to wear the Africa Cor uniform in my oppinion.
As to the swastica.
Well I do not think your prince knew what kind of uniform he was wearing (Africa Cor). He is an English prince and needs to be more cearfull.


I think we can agree that the man's grasp on hsitory is somewhat shaky to say the least - after all the Afrika Korps hardly fit into the context of the party, which was after all themed as 'Natives and Colonials'

He is not a Nazi and he was wearing it to a dress party and probably was meant to be a joke, so yes I do think it is fine wearing a swastica to a dress party.
Short-If a person is not a Nazi it is fine.

I would never justify wearing the swastika.

So, despite saying 'I would never justify wearing the swastika', you just justified wearing the swastika, yes?

he must know what he was doing, the brits send their ponces to sandhurst, he'd be complete moron if he didn't know the significance.

I think we can agree that the man's grasp on hsitory is somewhat shaky to say the least - after all the Afrika Korps hardly fit into the context of the party, which was after all themed as 'Natives and Colonials'

Agreed.




So, despite saying 'I would never justify wearing the swastika', you just justified wearing the swastika, yes?

Well I have been thinking about this and the last post I made on this subject to you I looked at it from your prince's point of view, this will be funny, so yes in that regard I did justifie it and stand by it. After all it was a joke and was meant to be funny, he is not a Nazi and does not support what the Nazi swastika stands for.
On the other hand I would never justifie wearing the swastika if that person really was a Nazi or does really admire what it stands for.

maybe the british should have a revolution...if that is their future.

The existence of conscientious objectors in WWII shows that if anyone here is indulging in historical revisionism, it is yourself.

Oh yes I'm sure there were massive peace demonstrations in bombed out Coventry, Birmingham, and London.

I can't find any historical texts that say the Parliament was assaulted by demonstrations and strikes to stop the bombing of Germany in WWII, but I'm sure they happened because you say the British people were so against bombing Germany into submission. :p

Oh yes I'm sure there were massive peace demonstrations in bombed out Coventry, Birmingham, and London.

I can't find any historical texts that say the Parliament was assaulted by demonstrations and strikes to stop the bombing of Germany in WWII, but I'm sure they happened because you say the British people were so against bombing Germany into submission. :p

So are you denying the existence of any conscientious objectors in the UK in WWII? At least 60,000 refused conscription, and of that amount over 3,000 were jailed. Are you claiming that all these individuals were not actually conscientious objectors or pacifists, but were instead, to a man and woman, just cowards?

I wonder if they'll ever understand that when government makes something like this illegal, it makes it more attractive to the rebellious.

Communism was responsilbe for more deaths throughout Europe than Naziism. Why aren't they calling for a ban on Communist symbols?

Perhaps it's because the whiners who are so ardently against symbols of the Third Reich are the same individuals who promote Communism.

To comment on the recent Prince Harry story, it seems unusual that the one thing a person cannot wear is a Nazi uniform. We are quite free to wear a Soviet uniform or even dress up as Satan (as many do on Halloween). But God forbid one should dress up as a Nazi. That is tantamount to heresy and high treason is the eyes of the P.C., pro-multicult puppet masters. In their eyes, a Nazi is worse than the Devil himself.

If they want to make this an equal-opportunity ban of offensive images, maybe they should include bans on the following:

- images of the former Soviet Union
- images of the Khmer Rouge
- images of Ghengis Khan
- images of Christianity (remember the hateful inquisition)
- images of the American Old West (because of the Indian wars)
- images of the North Korean military
- images of Saddam Hussein's Iraq
- images of Britain (because of their imperial rule for centuries)
- images of the African Hutus or Tutsis
- images of Imperial Rome

...........Ad nauseum

maybe the british should have a revolution...if that is their future.

They don't need a revolution. The Royals were asked back by Parliament to help stabilize the country after Cromwell. What Parliament giveth, so they can take away.

- images of the former Soviet Union
- images of the Khmer Rouge
- images of Ghengis Khan
- images of Christianity (remember the hateful inquisition)
- images of the American Old West (because of the Indian wars)
- images of the North Korean military
- images of Saddam Hussein's Iraq
- images of Britain (because of their imperial rule for centuries)
- images of the African Hutus or Tutsis
- images of Imperial Rome


Question for you: how many of those countries declared war on the UK?

(answer: one)

After getting the living crap bombed out of England no one in the UK gave a rat's ass how hard Bomber Command hit Germany, except that they were not hitting hard enough.

Harry will be forced to visit a concentration camp because he wore a nazi
arm band? Given the fact that Churchill instigated the bombing of civilians
by ordering the bombing of Berlin without provocation, I wonder if Harry
would be forced to visit Dresden or bombed out sections of Berlin where
millions of German civilians were murdered by allied bombs if Harry
had worn a WW2 era RAF uniform to that party. The German Luftwaffe
concentrated on English military targets. Then one day, Churchill decided
that it would be really cool to kill civilians in Berlin. Hitler retaliated
against London and the rest is history.

This video shows the plight and horror of the terrible Aryan holocaust that was the firebombing of Dresden by allied bombers, under the direction of the jewish Lindenman Plan.
http://www.solargeneral.com/library/dresden.rm

So are you denying the existence of any conscientious objectors in the UK in WWII? At least 60,000 refused conscription, and of that amount over 3,000 were jailed. Are you claiming that all these individuals were not actually conscientious objectors or pacifists, but were instead, to a man and woman, just cowards?

No, I'm just saying that the British people loved the fact that Bomber Command was fire bombing Germany. Loved it to death, couldn't get enough of it.

Your argument, that Bomber Command was only responsible for this and not a representation of the thoughts, feelings, and wishes of the British people is, well a load of wheat grass and veggie burger modern liberal revisionism. People in movie theaters cheered when they watched news reels of the bombing of German cities.

Harry will be forced to visit a concentration camp because he wore a nazi
arm band? Given the fact that Churchill instigated the bombing of civilians
by ordering the bombing of Berlin without provocation, I wonder if Harry
would be forced to visit Dresden or bombed out sections of Berlin where
millions of German civilians were murdered by allied bombs if Harry
had worn a WW2 era RAF uniform to that party. The German Luftwaffe
concentrated on English military targets. Then one day, Churchill decided
that it would be really cool to kill civilians in Berlin. Hitler retaliated
against London and the rest is history.

This video shows the plight and horror of the terrible Aryan holocaust that was the firebombing of Dresden by allied bombers, under the direction of the jewish Lindenman Plan.
http://www.solargeneral.com/library/dresden.rm



And so tonight we have gotten WWII historical revisionism from a German, a liberal UK Brit, and now an out and out Nazi who like the previous two just makes shit up as he goes along.

And so tonight we have gotten WWII historical revisionism from a German, a liberal UK Brit, and now an out and out Nazi who like the previous two just makes shit up as he goes along.

"When the argument is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser."
- Socrates

My post is backed up by substancial facts of history.

No, I'm just saying that the British people loved the fact that Bomber Command was fire bombing Germany. Loved it to death, couldn't get enough of it.

So, you are not denying that COs existed in the UK during WWII, and thus that some people were against the actions of Bomber Command and the firebombing of Dresden - this rather shows that your statement I early took issue with is untrue:

After getting the living crap bombed out of England no one in the UK gave a rat's ass how hard Bomber Command hit Germany, except that they were not hitting hard enough.

***

Your argument, that Bomber Command was only responsible for this and not a representation of the thoughts, feelings, and wishes of the British people is, well a load of wheat grass and veggie burger modern liberal revisionism. People in movie theaters cheered when they watched news reels of the bombing of German cities.

My argument is not that Bomber Command are solely responsible for the area bombing of civilian regions, nor that Harris himself is solely responsible - instead I am saying that there was not unanimous support for his actions. Certainly Churchill and the cabinet gave the go ahead for the operations and so share some blame, but they were called off within weeks, not because they were seen to be ineffective (it was far too early to tell what effect they would have on Germany as a whole), but rather because there were severe ethical doubts as to whether they were justified actions, even in the face of the Blitz that the UK had already undergone.

Given the fact that Churchill instigated the bombing of civilians by ordering the bombing of Berlin without provocation,



First bombing of Berlin by the RAF on the orders of Churchill: December 1941
First bombing of London by the Luftwaffe on the orders of Hitler: September 1940

The German Luftwaffe concentrated on English military targets. Then one day, Churchill decided that it would be really cool to kill civilians in Berlin. Hitler retaliated against London and the rest is history.

Speaking of history - exactly which alternative history timeline do you inhabit?

And so tonight we have gotten WWII historical revisionism from a German, a liberal UK Brit, and now an out and out Nazi who like the previous two just makes shit up as he goes along.

I have tried to reason with you but you cross the line.
You are in fact an Anti-German.

I have never in my life read as many naive posts as you have written.

And so tonight we have gotten WWII historical revisionism from a German, a liberal UK Brit, and now an out and out Nazi who like the previous two just makes shit up as he goes along.

Care to point out an instance where I 'made up shit' as I went along?

Originally Posted by Ultra Cool People
And so tonight we have gotten WWII historical revisionism from a German, a liberal UK Brit, and now an out and out Nazi who like the previous two just makes shit up as he goes along.



Care to point out an instance where I 'made up shit' as I went along?

Same here.

Originally Posted by Ultra Cool People
And so tonight we have gotten WWII historical revisionism from a German, a liberal UK Brit, and now an out and out Nazi who like the previous two just makes shit up as he goes along.



Care to point out an instance where I 'made up shit' as I went along?

Same here.

Well there was that bit when you said the German people didn't know what Hitler was doing, and there was that bit when you said German solders were brave and noble instead of murdering thieving scum hype up on meth.

Your just as bad as the white supremacists who post here, you are disinformation lite. The noblest thing America has ever done, and it has made up for many other sins, was to rip the living shit out of Germany.

Care to point out an instance where I 'made up shit' as I went along?

Well in your case it was the suggestion that somehow Bomber Command was a rogue agency, that this separation somehow insulates the British people from the total war bombings of Germany. Wake up and smell the charred smoking corpses Buddy, the UK did it, and they loved doing it and we in America helped you do it.

Yes the UK dropped hundreds of thousands of kilos of bombs on German civilians and they loved doing it. They sang and whistled as they did it and lionized the men who dropped them. That’s total warfare.

On the plus side it shortened the war so Germany surrendered before America finished the Atom Bomb. So by England slaughtering whole cities it probably saved the lives of millions of Germans. You can take that as consolation for being at heart the barbaric beef eater nation we know and love. Now go eat your veggie burger. :D

Well in your case it was the suggestion that somehow Bomber Command was a rogue agency, that this separation somehow insulates the British people from the total war bombings of Germany. Wake up and smell the charred smoking corpses Buddy, the UK did it, and they loved doing it and we in America helped you do it.

No, my point was not that Bomber Command was a rogua agency, instead that Arthur Harris, and to a lesser extent Churchill and the cabinet were responsible for the bombing of Dresden, and the fact that Churchill shortly afterwards expressed his grave doubts means that Harris is culpable in a way that the rest of the population is not.

For example, Churchill wrote during the closing stages of the war: "It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed ... The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of Allied bombing."



Yes the UK dropped hundreds of thousands of kilos of bombs on German civilians and they loved doing it. They sang and whistled as they did it and lionized the men who dropped them. That’s total warfare.

The point being that there was no unanimous support for the bombing of Dresden at the time - after all, it probably had very little effect on either the timetable or the eventual outcome of the war. The UK had already demonstrated how ineffective the conventional bombing of civilian areas was in breaking the morale of a nation, and it was folly to expect the German people to react in a way that the British had not.

On the plus side it shortened the war so Germany surrendered before America finished the Atom Bomb. So by England slaughtering whole cities it probably saved the lives of millions of Germans.

The devestation of Dresden did little to shorten WWII - the Soviet troops didn't come near it till April 1945 and by that time Berlin was all but encircled. You are claiming that the firebombing of Dresden was a pivotal point which lead to the suicide of Hitler and thus the shortening of the war - instead it was an act of highly questionable tactical efficiency which spurred grave doubts in the Cabinet and Air Ministry as soon as the full extent of the carnage became known.

You can take that as consolation for being at heart the barbaric beef eater nation we know and love. Now go eat your veggie burger. :D

Relevance? - other than the fact that this and the bombing of Dresden both revolve around the matter of charred flesh.

Never read Icke. We Americans are fairly obsessed with money and who has it. We like to keep track so we know where the hammer's going to fall, and who's doing the swinging.

Yes, you Americans are. We aren't. It's one of the reasons we don't elect millionaires to be Prime Minister. Maybe you should realise that the UK is not the US.

Oh but I'm sure you're correct. She's just a poor old woman, easy prey for the odd tabloid press tomato. Oh yes how could you possibly go in for republican sentiment and oust them when obviously the press can make fun of them. It's not like they can have a troublesome family member slaughtered with impunity. :D

You really should read Icke. Given your affinity for silly conspiracy theories, further shown above, I'm sure you'd find it a cracking read.

Yeah, its highly likely that Harry is Hewitts son but to be honest, who cares? I personaly believe the Royals should be struck from the civil list if all they're going to do is make fools of themselves. All the money that is poured into them could be used to give ORDINARY PEOPLE a decent education (not the comprehensive crap that we have now). Yes i go to an private school but i wouldnt need to if we had a decent system. Both my parents were state educated so why shouldnt i be? Lack of money? Get rid of the need to pay the Royals and we wouldnt be short of cash to put into the NHS, Education and transport.

OK, since my challenge to post why the Civil List came about went unanswered I just want to say this:

The monarchy do not cost UK taxpayers anything.

Yes, you Americans are. We aren't. It's one of the reasons we don't elect millionaires to be Prime Minister. Maybe you should realise that the UK is not the US.



You really should read Icke. Given your affinity for silly conspiracy theories, further shown above, I'm sure you'd find it a cracking read.



OK, since my challenge to post why the Civil List came about went unanswered I just want to say this:

The monarchy do not cost UK taxpayers anything.
Can't agree more, if the arguments continue I can cut and paste a nice three page breakdown of the proof of this.

Question for you: how many of those countries declared war on the UK?

(answer: one)
Germany never decalred war on the UK Japan did, Germany did not the Uk declared war on them. They may have responded in kind but it was never Hitlers intention to fight the UK.

The essence of this picture is that a member of the British royal family wore an armband that carried the symbol used by Hitler during his reign of terror. The Nazis were enemies of Britain, and of all people who endorse peace, freedom and equality. Someone failed to teach the brat how to live as if people are looking at him as some sort of world leader. The guy is just uncouth. He's a lout. He lacks grace. He is an awkward brutish person, who was born into a wealthy family -- and his parents failed to provide him with enough history lessons to understand that wearing a swastika is similar to dressing up in a Ku Klux Klan robe. It represents an endorsement of the most base evil that exists on earth. To whom should he apologize? He should apologize to any person who thinks British royalty are of any significance. As for me, I just think he is among the mentally retarded who were not taught enough social grace to not wear symbols of evil. The British royalty is nothing to me. In fact, from my perspective, the Americans of old kicked England's butt when we broke away from its rule over us as one of its colonies. So, Prince Harold is no more important than any other person. Still, I think it is in bad taste for any person to wear a swastika or a KKK robe, even if they don't endorse genocide, slavery and the like.

How do you know anything about this person?
Let me guess through the media. The media is owned and operated by professional bullshit artists and out right lyars!
Why are people offended by a symbol that is thousands of years old ?
The swastica wasn't even invented by the nazis!
And as far as someone wearing a kkk uniform so what they are racists i know a lot of asians, blacks, and jews that are racists what makes the kkk special? is it because they are white?
Communism has killed over 200 million world wide and that is way more than the nazis killed. In fact that is more people murdered than all the people that died in ww2 on all sides and you are worried about a nazi regime that has been gone for 60 years. The last time i looked there is still communists in power and communists running around in this country. Give your fucking head a shake, the enemy is all around you and you are too fucking stupid to see them!

The essence of this picture is that a member of the British royal family wore an armband that carried the symbol used by Hitler during his reign of terror. The Nazis were enemies of Britain, and of all people who endorse peace, freedom and equality. Someone failed to teach the brat how to live as if people are looking at him as some sort of world leader. The guy is just uncouth. He's a lout. He lacks grace. He is an awkward brutish person, who was born into a wealthy family -- and his parents failed to provide him with enough history lessons to understand that wearing a swastika is similar to dressing up in a Ku Klux Klan robe. It represents an endorsement of the most base evil that exists on earth. To whom should he apologize? He should apologize to any person who thinks British royalty are of any significance. As for me, I just think he is among the mentally retarded who were not taught enough social grace to not wear symbols of evil. The British royalty is nothing to me. In fact, from my perspective, the Americans of old kicked England's butt when we broke away from its rule over us as one of its colonies. So, Prince Harold is no more important than any other person. Still, I think it is in bad taste for any person to wear a swastika or a KKK robe, even if they don't endorse genocide, slavery and the like.
First off and just to be a pedant America never kicked Englands' but, as there was no such thing as America, colonists of British and other nationalities made it more trouble than it was perceived as being worth to hold the colony. Leading to the formation of the country that kept slavery and anti black legislation longer than most others (with the exception of south Africa).
It may have been ill advised for the PRince to wear the fancy dress costume he did, but some one in the UK could fine exception to anything he put on.
Still he was wrong and has admitted such.

No, my point was not that Bomber Command was a rogua agency, instead that Arthur Harris, and to a lesser extent Churchill and the cabinet were responsible for the bombing of Dresden, and the fact that Churchill shortly afterwards expressed his grave doubts means that Harris is culpable in a way that the rest of the population is not.

For example, Churchill wrote during the closing stages of the war: "It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed ... The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of Allied bombing."





The point being that there was no unanimous support for the bombing of Dresden at the time - after all, it probably had very little effect on either the timetable or the eventual outcome of the war. The UK had already demonstrated how ineffective the conventional bombing of civilian areas was in breaking the morale of a nation, and it was folly to expect the German people to react in a way that the British had not.



The devestation of Dresden did little to shorten WWII - the Soviet troops didn't come near it till April 1945 and by that time Berlin was all but encircled. You are claiming that the firebombing of Dresden was a pivotal point which lead to the suicide of Hitler and thus the shortening of the war - instead it was an act of highly questionable tactical efficiency which spurred grave doubts in the Cabinet and Air Ministry as soon as the full extent of the carnage became known.



Relevance? - other than the fact that this and the bombing of Dresden both revolve around the matter of charred flesh.


Now you just making stuff up to cover your argument, I never said that about Dresden.

Dresden was only one city in a wide campaign of bombing that included every major industrial city in Germany, and a whole lot of minor ones. What your saying is you can discount the entire North Africa Campaign because taking one water hole wouldn't have made that big a difference.

The purpose of the bombing campaign was to deny Germany the mean to wage industrial warfare. To do this you destroy machines, materials, and skilled workers. Dresden was just another target.

Yes, you Americans are. We aren't. It's one of the reasons we don't elect millionaires to be Prime Minister. Maybe you should realise that the UK is not the US.



You really should read Icke. Given your affinity for silly conspiracy theories, further shown above, I'm sure you'd find it a cracking read.



OK, since my challenge to post why the Civil List came about went unanswered I just want to say this:

The monarchy do not cost UK taxpayers anything.


You ah, really like that Civil List don't you. :D

The reason your defending the Monarchy so vociferously, is that your hoping to get vested in the system. I bet you’re a Civil Servant just like on "Yes Minister". :p

You ah, really like that Civil List don't you. :D

The reason your defending the Monarchy so vociferously, is that your hoping to get vested in the system. I bet you’re a Civil Servant just like on "Yes Minister". :p
No they are probaly more interested in facts that gutter press hype and slurs.

Media Media Media what would people do without you????? :rolleyes:

Media Media Media what would people do without you????? :rolleyes:
Research?

maybe the british should have a revolution...if that is their future.

The british have been having revolutions for decades. We do ours quietly with decorum, and without disturbing anyone else......the beauty of our constitution is that being unwritten there is nothing set in stone and nothing to revolt against. No-one could plausibly claim American democracy is superior.

The purpose of the bombing campaign was to deny Germany the mean to wage industrial warfare. To do this you destroy machines, materials, and skilled workers. Dresden was just another target.

Dresden was not an industrial city. If it had been it would have had heavy anti-aircraft cover, it didn't ! The allies lost 6 planes in 4 raids on that city.
What it did have though was thousands of refugees fleeing the russian advance.
http://www.solargeneral.com/library/dresden.rm

Dresden was not an industrial city. If it had been it would have had heavy anti-aircraft cover, it didn't ! The allies lost 6 planes in 4 raids on that city.
What it did have though was thousands of refugees fleeing the russian advance.
http://www.solargeneral.com/library/dresden.rm
Meaningfull as your points are and valid the argument may be but not for this thread.

100,000+ people just died in the biggest natural disaster in living memory.

...and yet here we are discussing prince harry's fancy dress costume.

100,000 people a day die of starvation in africa yet here we are eating on average 3000 calories a day, wasting tonnes of food and paying our farmers not to grow food......

Germany never decalred war on the UK Japan did, Germany did not the Uk declared war on them. They may have responded in kind but it was never Hitlers intention to fight the UK.

Germany wasn't actually on the list I was refering to though was it?

I thought http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4178643.stm (this) might interest you all:


Call for Europe-wide swastika ban

German politicians have called for Nazi symbols to be banned throughout Europe after Prince Harry was pictured wearing a swastika to a fancy dress party.

The Liberal group in the European Parliament argue all of Europe suffered because of the Nazis' crimes, so there should be a continent-wide ban.

Displaying the swastika and other Nazi symbols is illegal in Germany.

But the director of human rights group Liberty told the BBC education would be more beneficial than a ban.

A senior Christian Democrat said the proposal of a Europe-wide ban of the symbols may be discussed at the next meeting of European justice ministers.

The photograph of Harry in a costume with a Nazi swastika armband was taken at a friend's birthday party in Wiltshire last weekend.

The incident was broadcast around the world and the prince issued a statement in which he apologised for causing offence.

Vice-president of the Christian Democratic parliamentary group Wolfgang Bosback said the outfit "really lacked taste".

He said it was possible European justice ministers would discuss bringing in a European prohibition on displaying the swastika and other Nazi signs.

Liberal group vice-president Silvana Koch-Merin said: "All of Europe has suffered in the past because of the crimes of the Nazis, therefore it would be logical for Nazi symbols to be banned all over Europe."

She also called for the question to be placed on the agenda at the next meeting of justice ministers.

The vice-president of the parliamentary Social Democratic group, Michael Mueller, said a study was needed to find out how a German-style anti-Nazi law could be applied to the rest of Europe.

But Liberty director, Shami Chakrabarti, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme she felt banning the swastika would not solve "a serious social problem".

Every generation should be taught the full meaning of the symbols and the "horrors of the Holocaust", she said.

Ms Chakrabarti added: "I have a strong emotional response when I see a swastika, it makes my stomach turn."

But she said the last couple of weeks have shown her a whole generation of "decent, intelligent people" did not share this response and it was everyone's obligation to teach them the symbol's meaning.

"I don't think we should, in this country, sweep the swastika under the carpet. I think we should understand its full significance," Ms Chakrabarti said.

Banning Nazi symbols in Germany had not eradicated racism and the far right there, she added.

But German ambassador to Britain, Thomas Matussek, told Today the ban had helped put Germany among countries in Europe "with the least number of people subscribing to Nazi ideas".

He also pointed out that the Nazi symbols were not completely banned in Germany and were still used in education and arts.

"It was also out of respect to the victims that led us to introduce this sort of legislation half a century ago," Mr Matussek added.

So, it seems that the fatherland hasn't lost it's obsession with imposing it's will on the rest of the world....

I thought http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4178643.stm (this) might interest you all:


Now, that is just ludicrous, and as an added bonus there is a nice example of a complete failure to unerstand what logic actually is:

"All of Europe has suffered in the past because of the crimes of the Nazis, therefore it would be logical for Nazi symbols to be banned all over Europe."

You ah, really like that Civil List don't you. :D

The reason your defending the Monarchy so vociferously, is that your hoping to get vested in the system. I bet you’re a Civil Servant just like on "Yes Minister". :p

Ha ha ha. Lol. Lordy, you're a funny one.




Finished now?

WW2: Britain did declare war on Germany, after Germany had invaded a few countries.

We can of course look at the fire bombing of Berlin and lament how terrible it was in terms of human casualties, but equally, let us look at the London Blitz, Coventry Blitz and other bombings of British cities by the Luftwaffe.

The British responded in kind. It is what is known as War. The terrible thing it is.

Dresden was not bombing of industrial hardware, more so of German morale, and the results were devastating.

Strategically neccessary to win the war? No, although some would say psychologically, yes, to give the Germans "a jolly good spanking"

Bomber Harris's raid on Dresden and the destruction it caused meant he was passed over for a knighthood and other decorations.

Let us not forget that by that time Germany had it's back to the wall and the bombing of Dresden was just "rubbing it in"

Had the bombing took place in 1940, he may well have been more well recieved, when Britain had it's back to the wall and such a bombing would have been seen as more heroic.

Both sides bombed the shit out of each other, but when we look at Dresden Bombings, we should look at London's too. Human casaulties were high on both sides.


On the subject of banning Swatstikas Europe wide, I am against the idea. No matter how repulsive a symbol may seem, it must remain in the public eye to be properly taught as being used as a symbol for a dark age in human history.

To ban it, to eradicate it from history, is wrong. It is part of world history, and must not be forgotten.

Of course, we must not linger on history,but nor should we forget it, for whoever forgets history, is condemmned to repeat it.

If I was Charles, i'd demand a refund from Eton. Shed loads of cash on what can only be called a flawed education. Silly boy.

Education is the answer to the Swastika, not a ban.

How do you know anything about this person?
Let me guess through the media. The media is owned and operated by professional bullshit artists and out right lyars!
Why are people offended by a symbol that is thousands of years old ?
The swastica wasn't even invented by the nazis!
And as far as someone wearing a kkk uniform so what they are racists i know a lot of asians, blacks, and jews that are racists what makes the kkk special? is it because they are white?
Communism has killed over 200 million world wide and that is way more than the nazis killed. In fact that is more people murdered than all the people that died in ww2 on all sides and you are worried about a nazi regime that has been gone for 60 years. The last time i looked there is still communists in power and communists running around in this country. Give your fucking head a shake, the enemy is all around you and you are too fucking stupid to see them!

I think the key difference between the Nazis and the Communists is that the communists didn't attempt to go and conqueor the world. The Communists may have wanted to but desiring something does not provide the mens rea or the actus reus for the crime. Thanks to Hitler and his Napoleon complex, European power was completely and utterly destroyed: a power that had been built since the Roman Empire. Over 1000 years of hard work destroyed because of Nazism and its meglomaniac desire to rule all peoples. Nazism would crush individualism, crush faith (like it did to the Christian religion when it replaced it with it own religion) and smash freedom of thought. The Nazis (like many modern Muslim extremists) gained popular support by playing on a paranoid and completely irrational phobia of the Jews. There is nothing else of worth in Nazism - no enduring policies, no idealogies. At least Communism has a central doctrine to which it adheres but nazism runs on pure, malicious hatred.
I have no love of communism. I am a conservative. But I have no love of nazism either. A power that drove the entire of Europe into war out of a selfish and maddening hatred. I could never bring myself to believe in the same ideas as men who slaughtered so many of my countrymen.
The destruction of cities like Dresden was neccessary because Hitler could not see when he was beaten. He couldn't accept defeat and because he had no honour he refused to let many of his countrymen live in peace. He instead sacrificed many of the lives of his followers to his vainity and never ceasing lust for glory. There is nothing glorious about Hitler or the cult he created. Hitler was a mad man who would have destroyed everything and everyone to get his hands on power. Nazism is a cult run on hatred for others simply because they are different.

United Aryan Peoples, I have read many of your horrific posts before. You disgust me.

Maybe it is just me... I have no sympathy for Nazism, or the atrocities of Nazi Germany during the second world war, but:

How is one young man's choice of attire (whether or not it was a good choice) to a friend's birthday party, a matter of national, or world, importance?

Now - if he had worn it to a public engagement, or a diplomatic event.... then it might be a big deal.

If he had worn a Nazi uniform for a tour of the Holocaust Museum... then it might be a big deal.

What about if he had worn a roman toga? Just as irrelevent... but I guess most people are too lazy to read about history that happened more than a generation or so ago...

It sickens me that people invest so much energy into whatever the media tells them they should be offended by.

Maybe it is just me... I have no sympathy for Nazism, or the atrocities of Nazi Germany during the second world war, but:

How is one young man's choice of attire (whether or not it was a good choice) to a friend's birthday party, a matter of national, or world, importance?

Now - if he had worn it to a public engagement, or a diplomatic event.... then it might be a big deal.

If he had worn a Nazi uniform for a tour of the Holocaust Museum... then it might be a big deal.

What about if he had worn a roman toga? Just as irrelevent... but I guess most people are too lazy to read about history that happened more than a generation or so ago...

It sickens me that people invest so much energy into whatever the media tells them they should be offended by.
Small ripple of applause.

How is one young man's choice of attire (whether or not it was a good choice) to a friend's birthday party, a matter of national, or world, importance?

Do you admit, however, that his choice was an ill-advised one?

Do you admit, however, that his choice was an ill-advised one?
I will agree with you that it was ill advised, but the fuss has been way over the top! Don't see the papers complaining that the Paras sing a German military song at some regimental do's. (A song sung by the German para's during war time!).

The Communists may have wanted to but desiring something does not provide the mens rea or the actus reus for the crime.

refusing to leave poland and taking over half of eastern europe, however, does. i suggest you re-read your as-level criminal law notes....

Do you admit, however, that his choice was an ill-advised one?

No. Not at all.

The media shouldn't be trying to stir up a big deal over a BIRTHDAY PARTY, and a fancy dress party, at that.

So - the outfit didn't match the theme. Well, that's a wardrobe malfunction.

Why ill-advised? As I pointed out - people wear all kinds of other outfits to fancy dress parties... I've seen hundreds of devil costumes.

So - we are saying that Nazi's are worse than Hell?

why exactly are nazi unifoms being sold for entertainment purposes?
I blame the shop assistant!

Small ripple of applause.

Why, thank you. :)

refusing to leave poland and taking over half of eastern europe, however, does. i suggest you re-read your as-level criminal law notes....

Incorrect. they didn't acutally take over - just installed puppet government with very marginal sovereignty.

So - we are saying that Nazi's are worse than Hell?

How many people were killed in the C20th by devils and demons?

Maybe it is just me... I have no sympathy for Nazism, or the atrocities of Nazi Germany during the second world war, but:

How is one young man's choice of attire (whether or not it was a good choice) to a friend's birthday party, a matter of national, or world, importance?

Now - if he had worn it to a public engagement, or a diplomatic event.... then it might be a big deal.

If he had worn a Nazi uniform for a tour of the Holocaust Museum... then it might be a big deal.

What about if he had worn a roman toga? Just as irrelevent... but I guess most people are too lazy to read about history that happened more than a generation or so ago...

It sickens me that people invest so much energy into whatever the media tells them they should be offended by.

Well said. Especially the bit about the Romans... I know the tabloids wouldn't have made as big a deal out of it if Harry had dressed as one, yet what they did was on about the same level as what the Nazis tried to do.

Well there was that bit when you said the German people didn't know what Hitler was doing, and there was that bit when you said German solders were brave and noble instead of murdering thieving scum hype up on meth.

Well for the most part they did not know what he was doing and that is a fact so do not argue that.
The German soldiers were very brave and fought well, this is also said by the allied vetterens who were there, your own people, so my question is why do you argue that they were not? You are talking about the intire German Military as if they were murder squads.
Have you any idea what your "brave" allies did to my people when they invaded Germany?

Your just as bad as the white supremacists who post here, you are disinformation lite. The noblest thing America has ever done, and it has made up for many other sins, was to rip the living shit out of Germany.

FACT: You are Anti-German.
I am not a member of any white supremacists group nor will I ever be. Not one statement of mine here has had racist arguments in them. Are you blind or can you not read?
For your limited information bank here is probably a real shocker for you, I have friends that are of different origins then I, Asian, Pacific Islander even Cherokee Indian and I have let them see your posts and they think your probably the most missinfomed indevidual on earth or you just do not see the truth for your very naive patriotism.
Read one good history book, please, and then we can talk about the past.

I wonder if you would like to say what country you are from? If so I will post a list for you of all the "noble" things your people have done in the past. Not as an attack on you or your people but to show you that all nations have a dark past and that all are not allways what they seem.

How many people were killed in the C20th by devils and demons?

Any of them that died, with a very few exceptions... if you are to believe the way it is told in my neck of the woods.

How many people were ever killed by devils and demons? As an atheist, I find the whole conception laughable - but, at the same time, there are other people who take that kind of stuff very seriously.

Or, are we now judging 'badness' purely on the number of fatalities.

Which makes me wonder if people would have been so upset if Stalin, or Pol Pot costumes had been worn.

While I'm thinking about that - what if Harry had attempted to appease his US admirers, by wearing a World War II pilot jacket? Or, is it okay for the US to murder tens of millions of Japanese civilians? Or a good old fashioned prairie patriot... or is it okay to practice genocide if the victims are Native Americans?

The point is... Hitler is an icon. He is an easy target, because he requires no thought. Because the media makes him a demon, and the Nazis, an army of darkness. He has been allowed to acheive almost supernatural infamy, mostly to further the political aims of others, it seems.

My point is - the mass population is being told to be horrified by this 'horrible action', and are leaping to attention like marionettes with jerked strings.

Or, are we now judging 'badness' purely on the number of fatalities.

No, but comparing an actual existent set of inhuman actions (those of the Nazi regime) with something that is either non-existent or viewed to be a state of removal from the divine, seems to be missing the point somehow.

THe reason I keep asking whether people think the wearing of the Swastika was ill-judged is because it seems plain to me that someone so close in line to the throne wearing it, even as a 'joke'*, would cause this kind of media outcry and general distaste in the public.


* and it is not as if he had worn in a manner so as to mock the things it stood for or ridicule its adherents: the entirity of the joke seemed to be 'look at me! I'm a Nazi!'. I fail to see the humour here.

No, but comparing an actual existent set of inhuman actions (those of the Nazi regime) with something that is either non-existent or viewed to be a state of removal from the divine, seems to be missing the point somehow.

THe reason I keep asking whether people think the wearing of the Swastika was ill-judged is because it seems plain to me that someone so close in line to the throne wearing it, even as a 'joke'*, would cause this kind of media outcry and general distaste in the public.


* and it is not as if he had worn in a manner so as to mock the things it stood for or ridicule its adherents: the entirity of the joke seemed to be 'look at me! I'm a Nazi!'. I fail to see the humour here.

Okay - first... it was a Fancy Dress party, no? That means everyone goes in a costume, yes?

Well, Harry chose to go as a Nazi... that doesn't mean he IS a Nazi, any more than he would actually be a gorilla in a gorilla suit. It doesn't even mean he has Nazi sympathies... again, unless a man in a gorilla suit is secretly supporting the Gorilla Agenda.

Personally - I don't see why he SHOULD have worn it to be mocking. There were many Nazis who believed they were doing good work, who weren't involved directly in any of the atrocity.

You utterly steer clear, I note, of the fact that many people have been involved in horrendous atrocity (Manifest Destiny being my 'favourite' example)... and yet, Hitler and his Regime are singled out as the 'big bad'.

The problem here ISN'T what Harry wore... it's the fact that the world media has the masses so 'whipped', they'll froth at the mouth, just because the bell rings.

Incorrect. they didn't acutally take over - just installed puppet government with very marginal sovereignty.

Sovereignty? Well the millions of poles, czechs, e.germans etc who were sent to gulags on Stalin's orders might contest that that sovereignty was marginally non-existent. And if we're really going to get arbitrary about this I can point out the following - desiring something does not constitute mens rea but intending something shoud happen and taking steps to ensure it happens does. SO what part of th Soviet Union's behaviour would you say doesn't fulfill that criteria? Of course, it depends what this "crime" is - murder involves intent but many other crimes don't, indeed some crimes don't even require a mens rea. Don't bandy about terminology if you can't use it properly.
:rolleyes:

Okay - first... it was a Fancy Dress party, no? That means everyone goes in a costume, yes?

Well, Harry chose to go as a Nazi... that doesn't mean he IS a Nazi, any more than he would actually be a gorilla in a gorilla suit. It doesn't even mean he has Nazi sympathies... again, unless a man in a gorilla suit is secretly supporting the Gorilla Agenda.

Yup, but the shitstorm that it was very likely to create should have been obvious to anyone with an ounce of sense.

Personally - I don't see why he SHOULD have worn it to be mocking. There were many Nazis who believed they were doing good work, who weren't involved directly in any of the atrocity.

I'm making this point because people have passed it off as a joke, whereas I see little humourous content.

You utterly steer clear, I note, of the fact that many people have been involved in horrendous atrocity (Manifest Destiny being my 'favourite' example)... and yet, Hitler and his Regime are singled out as the 'big bad'.

I don't think I have actually commented on the wearing of the swastika as other than ill-advised: similarly if he had dressed up as one of the twin towers with a plane sticking out of him, then I think that would have been equally ill-advised.

Yup, but the shitstorm that it was very likely to create should have been obvious to anyone with an ounce of sense.

I'm making this point because people have passed it off as a joke, whereas I see little humourous content.

I don't think I have actually commented on the wearing of the swastika as other than ill-advised: similarly if he had dressed up as one of the twin towers with a plane sticking out of him, then I think that would have been equally ill-advised.

Fancy Dress = not a bit of sense anyway. Fancy Dress = for fun.

Also - Swastika existed long before Nazism, and will continue to exist long after Nazism is as forgotten as Rome. It IS a historical symbol - and nobody should have the right to LEGISLATE history... or to censor it to suit their purpose, or to tell others what is an acceptable view of it.

I don't think it ill advised. Perhaps, photographing birthday parties is a bad idea.

Perhaps, buying into the media circus is a bad idea.

I once dressed up as the Grim Reaper... was that ill advised? After all... everyone that dies, dies of Death.

Also - Swastika existed long before Nazism, and will continue to exist long after Nazism is as forgotten as Rome. It IS a historical symbol - and nobody should have the right to LEGISLATE history... or to censor it to suit their purpose, or to tell others what is an acceptable view of it.

Certainly, but it is not as if the idiot prince was wearing it while dressed as a Buddhist monk or the like: it was unquestionably in the context of Nazisms.

I don't think it ill advised. Perhaps, photographing birthday parties is a bad idea.

Perhaps, buying into the media circus is a bad idea.

Have we reached some kind of common ground: my opinion is that the media reaction given the curent climate surrounding the Nazis is a given, and thus wearing the Swastika was ill-advised, whereas you are of the opinion that the media reaction was ill-advised (but entirely predictable), yes?

Originally Posted by Grave_n_idle
You utterly steer clear, I note, of the fact that many people have been involved in horrendous atrocity (Manifest Destiny being my 'favourite' example)... and yet, Hitler and his Regime are singled out as the 'big bad'.


Manifest destiny did not kill six million Jews and millions of others. plus Hitler and the third Reich were conceved in a so called Civilised society and it is pretty current. Plus it isn't like manifest destiny strove to destroy every "non-pure" person in the world or to posses every territory in the world in a totaliterian rule. so i think it is an unfair comparison. but it would be equally inappropriate for any dignitary to dress up as a slave owner, japanese death march officer, an Iquisitionist, a Crusader, a terrorist, Saddam Hussein, or Robespierre. it just so happen he dressed up as a Nazi.

Certainly, but it is not as if the idiot prince was wearing it while dressed as a Buddhist monk or the like: it was unquestionably in the context of Nazisms.

Have we reached some kind of common ground: my opinion is that the media reaction given the curent climate surrounding the Nazis is a given, and thus wearing the Swastika was ill-advised, whereas you are of the opinion that the media reaction was ill-advised (but entirely predictable), yes?

I think the media circus was to be expected.

I am disappointed that so many people volunteer to be dogs for the media pavlovian propoganda.

I just don't think dressing up as something necessarily MEANS anything, ESPECIALLY in the context of a birthday fancy dress party.

And, since Nazism is a valid part of history.. I don't understand why people allow this 'superstitious' treatment... like, even saying Nazi will make the devil appear, or something.

Originally Posted by Grave_n_idle
You utterly steer clear, I note, of the fact that many people have been involved in horrendous atrocity (Manifest Destiny being my 'favourite' example)... and yet, Hitler and his Regime are singled out as the 'big bad'.


Manifest destiny did not kill six million Jews and millions of others. plus Hitler and the third Reich were conceved in a so called Civilised society and it is pretty current. Plus it isn't like manifest destiny strove to destroy every "non-pure" person in the world or to posses every territory in the world in a totaliterian rule. so i think it is an unfair comparison. but it would be equally inappropriate for any dignitary to dress up as a slave owner, japanese death march officer, an Iquisitionist, a Crusader, a terrorist, Saddam Hussein, or Robespierre. it just so happen he dressed up as a Nazi.

No - Manifest Destiny didn't kill off many Jews... but, so what? Nazism didn't attempt the Genocide of the American Native.... what's your point?

Manifest destiny did seek to destroy every non 'american' (as they perceived it) on a continent.

Personally, I think that the greatest single atrocity of WW2 was the bombing of Japanese civilians with nuclear devices...

the fire bombing of dresden killed more german civilians than both hiroshima and nagasaki combined

the fire bombing of dresden killed more german civilians than both hiroshima and nagasaki combined

Exactly how many German civilians were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Exactly how many German civilians were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
I just practically fell off my chair laughing at that!
:D

About 70,000 people died at Hiroshima and about 40,000 at Nagasaki, and many thousands more were injured.
Lowkeynia must really start reading his own posts.

Well for the most part they did not know what he was doing and that is a fact so do not argue that.
The German soldiers were very brave and fought well, this is also said by the allied vetterens who were there, your own people, so my question is why do you argue that they were not? You are talking about the intire German Military as if they were murder squads.
Have you any idea what your "brave" allies did to my people when they invaded Germany?



FACT: You are Anti-German.
I am not a member of any white supremacists group nor will I ever be. Not one statement of mine here has had racist arguments in them. Are you blind or can you not read?
For your limited information bank here is probably a real shocker for you, I have friends that are of different origins then I, Asian, Pacific Islander even Cherokee Indian and I have let them see your posts and they think your probably the most missinfomed indevidual on earth or you just do not see the truth for your very naive patriotism.
Read one good history book, please, and then we can talk about the past.

I wonder if you would like to say what country you are from? If so I will post a list for you of all the "noble" things your people have done in the past. Not as an attack on you or your people but to show you that all nations have a dark past and that all are not allways what they seem.


Well I'm an American.

As far as noble things we have done, we bombed the crap of Nazi Germany and we bombed the crap out of Imperial Japan. Not that we didn't have loads of eager help from our British and Russians allies with Germany, but wasting Japan from the air was pretty much an American show, though we couldn't have done it without Australian help.

You may find this amusing, but I've been to Germany quite a few times, so many times that I have a really massive beer stein collection. I think Germany is a very pretty country except for cities like Frankfurt, (that we bombed) they have very little character. I didn't meet one German person I did not like, (except for a hotel clerk in Lindbergh). All things considered I love Germany as it is, but I despise what you were.

I despise anyone who participated in what you were, and there is nothing you can say that will change that. I find nothing brave and noble about the Hun that marched across Europe, just in the peoples who resisted them and died.

You would have us believe that WWII was some kind of chivalric joust. A contest of the brave and noble, well it wasn't. It was a low down dirty total war where Germany's army slaughtered millions of civilians just like the Japanese army in China. We noble and brave allies waged total war back at Germany and we won. Believe it or not the world actually rejoiced, and that doesn't happen very often.

About 70,000 people died at Hiroshima and about 40,000 at Nagasaki, and many thousands more were injured.
Lowkeynia must really start reading his own posts.

Interestingly the official city of Dresden site (http://www.dresden.de/index.html?page=/eng/02/07/01/c_13.html) gives a figure of 'only' "at least 25,000", while Wikipedia (insert standard Wikipedia caveat) talks about recent estimates of 35,000, but notes that up to 140,000 has been claimed.