Oh, Sun.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-33578174?ocid=socialflow_facebook
QuoteQueen Nazi salute film: Palace 'disappointed' at use
Buckingham Palace has said it is disappointed that footage from 1933 showing the Queen performing a Nazi salute has been released.
The Sun has published the film which shows the Queen aged about seven, with her mother, sister and uncle.
The palace said it was "disappointing that film, shot eight decades ago... has been obtained and exploited".
The newspaper has refused to say how it got the footage but said it was an "important and interesting story".
'Misleading and dishonest'
The black and white footage, which lasts about 17 seconds, shows the Queen playing with a dog on the lawn in the gardens of Balmoral, the Sun says.
The Queen Mother then raises her arm in the style of a Nazi salute and, after glancing towards her mother, the Queen mimics the gesture. Prince Edward, the future Edward VIII, is also seen raising his arm.
The footage is thought to have been shot in 1933 or 1934, when Hitler was rising to prominence as Fuhrer in Germany but the circumstances in which it was shot are unclear.
A Palace source said: "Most people will see these pictures in their proper context and time. This is a family playing and momentarily referencing a gesture many would have seen from contemporary news reels.
"No one at that time had any sense how it would evolve. To imply anything else is misleading and dishonest."
'Fascinating insight'
The source added: "The Queen and her family's service and dedication to the welfare of this nation during the war, and the 63 years the Queen has spent building relations between nations and peoples speaks for itself."
BBC Royal correspondent Sarah Campbell said Buckingham Palace was not denying the footage was authentic but that there were "questions over how this video has been released".
Who was the man in the video?
- Edward was uncle of the young princess Elizabeth and brother of George VI
- He briefly became King himself in 1936 but abdicated just 326 days later because of his plans to marry American divorcee Wallis Simpson - a marriage government and church figures deemed unacceptable
- Replaced by George VI, Edward was one of the shortest reigning monarchs in British history
- In October 1937, Edward and his wife - by now the Duke and Duchess of Windsor - visited Nazi Germany
- During the controversial visit they met Hitler, dined with his deputy, Rudolf Hess, and went to a concentration camp
- He moved to France with the Duchess after the war and died there in 1972
Dickie Arbiter :lol:, a former Buckingham Palace press secretary, said the Palace would be investigating.
"They'll be wondering whether it was in fact something that was held in the Royal Archives at Windsor, or whether it was being held by the Duke of Windsor's estate," he said.
"And if it was the Duke of Windsor's estate, then somebody has clearly taken it from the estate and here it is, 82 years later.
"But a lot of questions have got to be asked and a lot of questions got to be answered."
Sun managing editor Stig Abell said he did not accept Buckingham Palace's accusation that the footage has been "exploited".
He said the newspaper had decided to publish the story because it was of great public importance and the involvement of Prince Edward gave it "historical significance".
The then Prince of Wales faced numerous accusations of being a Nazi sympathiser and was photographed meeting Hitler in Munich in October 1937.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fichef.bbci.co.uk%2Fnews%2F660%2Fcpsprodpb%2F438E%2Fproduction%2F_84349271_84349268.jpg&hash=41c5abe0f97be482ea7935d47bd633e6494b4f7d)
Sun article with video: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6548665/Their-Royal-b-classredHeilbnesses.html?CMP=spklr-_-S9SunSocial-_-TWITTER-_-TheSunNewspaper-_-20150717-_-Royals-_-209827137
Talk about a stormtrooper in a tea cup? :rolleyes:
Front page :lol:
You can't take Germany out of the German.
:lol: That's pretty despicable!
Isn't that how people said the Pledge of Allegiance back then?
I'm surprised the pretend reason for Edward VIII's abdication is still mentioned by BBC. I thought it was a general consensus he was forced to abdicate because of his nazi sympathies?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 18, 2015, 07:22:46 AM
Isn't that how people said the Pledge of Allegiance back then?
I think it is fairly clear they are mimicking Hitler though.
I hate to be on the side of Sun here - and clearly, the Queen being 7 yo at the time is completely blameless in this - but this statement is patently false:
QuoteNo one at that time had any sense how it would evolve. To imply anything else is misleading and dishonest."
You could say that for an average Briton at the time, but adult members of royal family should have more sense or knowledge of current affairs to know better.
Quote from: Martinus on July 18, 2015, 07:23:16 AM
I'm surprised the pretend reason for Edward VIII's abdication is still mentioned by BBC. I thought it was a general consensus he was forced to abdicate because of his nazi sympathies?
Why must you try to tear down every straight figure in history?
Quote from: Martinus on July 18, 2015, 07:23:16 AM
I'm surprised the pretend reason for Edward VIII's abdication is still mentioned by BBC. I thought it was a general consensus he was forced to abdicate because of his nazi sympathies?
Revisionist nonsense.
Quote from: Martinus on July 18, 2015, 07:23:16 AM
I'm surprised the pretend reason for Edward VIII's abdication is still mentioned by BBC. I thought it was a general consensus he was forced to abdicate because of his nazi sympathies?
No, that is not the general consensus. Baldwin was pretty upfront with the King about this, there is no reason to think he was lying.
I like Lizzy's version; her dancing a jig after rendering salute.
I like how they had to illustrate what the Nazi salute looked like by showing a comparative image of Hitler on the front page for those intellectual Sun readers.
The Guardian wouldn't need to do that. :D
Please, my kids were doing that at age 2.
Liz= Slow
Quote from: Josephus on July 18, 2015, 07:48:30 PM
I like how they had to illustrate what the Nazi salute looked like by showing a comparative image of Hitler on the front page for those intellectual Sun readers.
The Guardian wouldn't need to do that. :D
Lol
Should have had the demonstration on page 3 :bowler:
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 18, 2015, 07:50:42 PM
Liz= Slow
one more reason to get rid of her as head of state. Poor judgment and slow intellect.
Quote from: viper37 on July 18, 2015, 11:35:15 PM
one more reason to get rid of her as head of state. Poor judgment and slow intellect.
Watch "The Queen" if you can on cable. It will change your entire mindset about the British royal family.
The 2006 one?
Yeah.
Bah Hitler had hardly done anything evil in 1933. That gesture was more closely associated with Mussolini beating up Communists and making the trains run on time back then.
Plus, you know, they could just be goofing around. Maybe even mocking the Nazzies.
Quote from: derspiess on July 20, 2015, 11:23:16 AM
Plus, you know, they could just be goofing around. Maybe even mocking the Nazzies.
They were kind of silly looking before they started being horrifying.
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 11:16:21 AM
Bah Hitler had hardly done anything evil in 1933. That gesture was more closely associated with Mussolini beating up Communists and making the trains run on time back then.
He had written an evil book. People just didn't bother reading it.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 20, 2015, 11:45:15 AM
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 11:16:21 AM
Bah Hitler had hardly done anything evil in 1933. That gesture was more closely associated with Mussolini beating up Communists and making the trains run on time back then.
He had written an evil book. People just didn't bother reading it.
It wasn't really a page turner.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 20, 2015, 11:45:15 AM
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 11:16:21 AM
Bah Hitler had hardly done anything evil in 1933. That gesture was more closely associated with Mussolini beating up Communists and making the trains run on time back then.
He had written an evil book. People just didn't bother reading it.
Only two times it was read - during his regime and later polisci courses.
Quote from: viper37 on July 18, 2015, 11:35:15 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 18, 2015, 07:50:42 PM
Liz= Slow
one more reason to get rid of her as head of state. Poor judgment and slow intellect.
Heh I saw this "news" item and my immediate thought was 'Vipes must be delighted'. :D
Lack of intellect or ability are actually pluses in her job. You don't want somebody who might accidentally say an independent thought and trigger a political backlash.
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 12:05:01 PM
Lack of intellect or ability are actually pluses in her job. You don't want somebody who might accidentally say an independent thought and trigger a political backlash.
:yes: Her 'job' is basically just to exist, unfortunately. I think it'd be awesome to live under a capable absolute monarch but those days are long gone.
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:11:41 PM
I think it'd be awesome to live under a capable absolute monarch but those days are long gone.
Charles XII. :yes: :wub:
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:11:41 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 12:05:01 PM
Lack of intellect or ability are actually pluses in her job. You don't want somebody who might accidentally say an independent thought and trigger a political backlash.
:yes: Her 'job' is basically just to exist, unfortunately. I think it'd be awesome to live under a capable absolute monarch but those days are long gone.
Frederick II would have lasted about a week in her job before killing himself.
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 12:25:13 PM
Frederick II would have lasted about a week in her job before killing himself conquering Europe.
:)
Which Frederick II? The fag deserter?
All you need to conquer Europe these days is a sternly worded letter so maybe so :P
Quote from: The Brain on July 20, 2015, 12:29:00 PM
Which Frederick II? The fag deserter?
Either one works. The famous ones at least, I am sure there are dozens of Frederick IIs.
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 12:05:01 PM
Lack of intellect or ability are actually pluses in her job. You don't want somebody who might accidentally say an independent thought and trigger a political backlash.
Naw, it takes a lot of skill and nuance to influence policy without officially influencing policy. Think about her trip to Ireland as an example.
Quote from: The Brain on July 20, 2015, 12:29:00 PM
Which Frederick II? The fag deserter?
I like to think of him as a the gayest conqueror since Alexander. :)
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:36:05 PM
Quote from: The Brain on July 20, 2015, 12:29:00 PM
Which Frederick II? The fag deserter?
I like to think of him as a the gayest conqueror since Alexander. :)
While he was a fine King I think the entire known world is more impressive than Silesia. No offense to Silesia I am sure it is lovely.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 20, 2015, 12:33:29 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 12:05:01 PM
Lack of intellect or ability are actually pluses in her job. You don't want somebody who might accidentally say an independent thought and trigger a political backlash.
Naw, it takes a lot of skill and nuance to influence policy without officially influencing policy. Think about her trip to Ireland as an example.
Huh you make a compelling point. I guess I figured anybody of skill or ambition would eventually snap and start calling her politicians morons or something.
Quote from: Malthus on July 20, 2015, 12:03:49 PM
Quote from: viper37 on July 18, 2015, 11:35:15 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 18, 2015, 07:50:42 PM
Liz= Slow
one more reason to get rid of her as head of state. Poor judgment and slow intellect.
Heh I saw this "news" item and my immediate thought was 'Vipes must be delighted'. :D
and you guessed right!
Though it is pretty much insignificant. I must have done this myself around that age.
Somebody gave me a Confederate kepi when I was a kid and I wore it all the time. So that might be a tad embarrassing if somebody dug that up once I was made King of England.
'Hey that could be a gray kepi from any army!'
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:11:41 PM
I think it'd be awesome to live under a capable absolute monarch but those days are long gone.
I think some of your ancestors just turned in their grave :P
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 12:37:09 PM
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:36:05 PM
Quote from: The Brain on July 20, 2015, 12:29:00 PM
Which Frederick II? The fag deserter?
I like to think of him as a the gayest conqueror since Alexander. :)
While he was a fine King I think the entire known world is more impressive than Silesia. No offense to Silesia I am sure it is lovely.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.c.photoshelter.com%2Fimg-get%2FI0000sEMr0K_ytaE%2Fs%2F850%2F850%2F008-Poland-Silesia-1991.jpg&hash=2bf7828d5d9bee980dcafada0404443bf4c918c8)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.c.photoshelter.com%2Fimg-get%2FI0000SyrFX8lIdn4%2Fs%2F850%2F850%2F022-Poland-Silesia-1991.jpg&hash=f1c42983abeab1a253ee63d2a69af74d9eba33a5)
Quote from: viper37 on July 20, 2015, 12:50:01 PM
I think some of your ancestors just turned in their grave :P
Are you referring to my many ancestors who fought in the American Revolution? If so they didn't live under a capable absolute monarch either before or after the war. :hmm:
In fact they moved to the New World to protest Parliament not bowing to the wise rule of Charles I. True story :P
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 01:00:59 PM
In fact they moved to the New World to protest Parliament not bowing to the wise rule of Charles I. True story :P
:face:
Quote from: Syt on July 20, 2015, 12:54:35 PM
*photos of Prussian glory*
Sic transit gloria mundi indeed.
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:27:40 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 12:25:13 PM
Frederick II would have lasted about a week in her job before killing himself conquering Europe.
:)
had he been in England, there would have been no one to fight and win some actual battles on the continent for him.
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:55:44 PM
Are you referring to my many ancestors who fought in the American Revolution?
Yes.
QuoteIf so they didn't live under a capable absolute monarch either before or after the war. :hmm:
Well, that's the thing with royalty. By the time you know they are incapable, you are stuck with them for another 30 years or so. At least in a democracy it lasts less than a decade.
Quote from: viper37 on July 20, 2015, 07:51:48 PM
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:27:40 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 20, 2015, 12:25:13 PM
Frederick II would have lasted about a week in her job before killing himself conquering Europe.
:)
had he been in England, there would have been no one to fight and win some actual battles on the continent for him.
I think that his mother was only a couple of deaths away from inheriting the British throne, so Frederick II could have been King of England and Prussia if he'd been a little more lucky.
Quote from: viper37 on July 20, 2015, 07:51:48 PM
had he been in England, there would have been no one to fight and win some actual battles on the continent for him.
:lol:
Awesome.
Quote from: viper37 on July 20, 2015, 07:53:56 PM
Well, that's the thing with royalty. By the time you know they are incapable, you are stuck with them for another 30 years or so. At least in a democracy it lasts less than a decade.
You see the guys who originally designed monarchy didn't expect too many of them to live past 40.
Quote from: The Brain on July 20, 2015, 12:23:08 PM
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:11:41 PM
I think it'd be awesome to live under a capable absolute monarch but those days are long gone.
Charles XII. :yes: :wub:
Wasn't he the guy that lost all those battles and allowed Russia to expand west? He's the worst guy ever.
Quote from: Neil on July 21, 2015, 07:53:52 AM
Wasn't he the guy that lost all those battles and allowed Russia to expand west? He's the worst guy ever.
He beat up Poland and Denmark though.
Quote from: Valmy on July 21, 2015, 08:17:52 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 21, 2015, 07:53:52 AM
Wasn't he the guy that lost all those battles and allowed Russia to expand west? He's the worst guy ever.
He beat up Poland and Denmark though.
He also inspired Voltaire's
Histoire de Charles XII. :) :frog:
Quote from: Neil on July 21, 2015, 07:53:52 AM
Quote from: The Brain on July 20, 2015, 12:23:08 PM
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:11:41 PM
I think it'd be awesome to live under a capable absolute monarch but those days are long gone.
Charles XII. :yes: :wub:
Wasn't he the guy that lost all those battles and allowed Russia to expand west? He's the worst guy ever.
:hmm:
Quote from: The Brain on July 21, 2015, 09:47:27 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 21, 2015, 07:53:52 AM
Quote from: The Brain on July 20, 2015, 12:23:08 PM
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:11:41 PM
I think it'd be awesome to live under a capable absolute monarch but those days are long gone.
Charles XII. :yes: :wub:
Wasn't he the guy that lost all those battles and allowed Russia to expand west? He's the worst guy ever.
:hmm:
Charles XII, worse than Hitler? The first Hitler? :hmm: Indeed.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on July 21, 2015, 10:00:59 AM
Quote from: The Brain on July 21, 2015, 09:47:27 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 21, 2015, 07:53:52 AM
Quote from: The Brain on July 20, 2015, 12:23:08 PM
Quote from: Caliga on July 20, 2015, 12:11:41 PM
I think it'd be awesome to live under a capable absolute monarch but those days are long gone.
Charles XII. :yes: :wub:
Wasn't he the guy that lost all those battles and allowed Russia to expand west? He's the worst guy ever.
:hmm:
Charles XII, worse than Hitler? The first Hitler? :hmm: Indeed.
Charles XII wasn't worse than Hitler. Hitler was a vegetarian.
I think you mean VegetAryan.