bridge too far Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 What is of some concern is that Facebook is reportedly closing down some 'anti' sites! http://choler.co.uk/?p=703 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 What is of some concern is that Facebook is reportedly closing down some 'anti' sites! http://choler.co.uk/?p=703 Well, that looks impartial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 Well, that looks impartial. Funny you should say that - the BNP still has a live Facebook page, but it seems the EDL FB page has been closed down. Freedom of Speech huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 Oh great. Another thread where human beings voice different opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 I think you're on to something here. Let's get the majority to decide who becomes head of state. We could call it an election, and vote every 4 years. I'd only agree to this if my 3rd or 4th choices counted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 Oh great. Another thread where human beings voice different opinions. Imagine how boring life would be if we all agreed with you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 Imagine how boring life would be if we all agreed with you Nope. Lost me there. (I'm easily confused mind you) :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 Funny you should say that - the BNP still has a live Facebook page, but it seems the EDL FB page has been closed down. Freedom of Speech huh? BNP, like it or not are a legitimate political party...the others are/boarderline extremist groups Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 BNP, like it or not are a legitimate political party...the others are/boarderline extremist groups That's a fair point, although some of the other groups are legitimate political parties too. However, my objection is to Facebook deciding what people should / should not be able to read. I don't recall electing them as aribters of what is OK to look at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 That's a fair point, although some of the other groups are legitimate political parties too. However, my objection is to Facebook deciding what people should / should not be able to read. I don't recall electing them as aribters of what is OK to look at. if a group is classed as an extremist group..any right minded site owner would do what they could to keep it off their space Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 if a group is classed as an extremist group..any right minded site owner would do what they could to keep it off their space For example: Bristol Bookfair Bootle Labour Party Big Society Leeds Westminster Trades Council Central London SWP (Socialist Workers' Party is a legitimate electioneering party) to name but a few. Hardly extremist organisations! I think you've hit the nail on the head, though. Facebook IS a right-minded site owner, with the emphasis on RIGHT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 BNP, like it or not are a legitimate political party...the others are/boarderline extremist groups By banning people you are conceding they have an argument. Debate should never be stifled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 By banning people you are conceding they have an argument. Debate should never be stifled. Hey! We agree on something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 Hey! We agree on something Take a deep breathe and wait for a another post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junction 9 Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 Out of interest, what events do you think could be created in this country that would be celebrated like yesterdays, should the monarchy be removed? Most sports can be ruled out as the Union countries particiapte in most as seperate nations. As someone mentioned earlier St Georege's day has never taken off in this country and is again something that could only be celebrated seperately. Throughout my lifetime it's only been Royal weddings, State funerals and Jubilees that have ever really pulled this country together as a whole. Those, and maybe the end of wars. Having read 7 pages of views, most of which support the republican standpoint both sides have merits to the argument. I just feel that whether your point is from an ecconomic one or purely ethical one, if we never have a day like yesterday in this country again we would have lost something very special. I can't think of anything to replace it with and as long as the Royal family have no real detremental effect on my life there's no reason for them to go anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 Out of interest, what events do you think could be created in this country that would be celebrated like yesterdays, should the monarchy be removed? Most sports can be ruled out as the Union countries particiapte in most as seperate nations. As someone mentioned earlier St Georege's day has never taken off in this country and is again something that could only be celebrated seperately. Throughout my lifetime it's only been Royal weddings, State funerals and Jubilees that have ever really pulled this country together as a whole. Those, and maybe the end of wars. A few flag waving stalkers and Lady Di fanatics is hardly a celebration. Most people used it as a **** up. If St George's day was a Bank Holiday we could all have a **** up then. My choice would be Independance day, the day that the Heredity privilege was ended and England joined the grown up nations of the world, where every single English man and women, was born equal.That would be a great celebration....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 A few flag waving stalkers and Lady Di fanatics is hardly a celebration. Most people used it as a **** up. If St George's day was a Bank Holiday we could all have a **** up then. My choice would be Independance day, the day that the Heredity privilege was ended and England joined the grown up nations of the world, where every single English man and women, was born equal.That would be a great celebration....... Quite. William and Kate have done nothing more to earn their 'celebrity' status than did Jade Goody. Gushing feebly over the wedding of two dubious celebrities therefore makes no sense, unless it's somehow thought to be a good idea to have a collective emote over these self/family appointed celebs. It'a all just a bit pathetic watching grown-ups acting like weepy nine-year-old girls addicted to OK Magazine. Good luck to anyone (and that includes, I suspect, the majority) who used the occasion as nothing more than a good excuse for a p!ss up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 I'm oft amused by Monarchists confusing Republicans with being left wing. Yes, it's dumb. By far Britain's most famous republican is Thomas Paine, a touchstone thinker for American Independence - hardly a hard-left socialist. His put-down of the whole idea of monarchy, particularly in Britain, still reads pretty well: "...the most plausible plea which has been offered in favour of hereditary succession is that it preserves a nation from civil wars; and were this true, it would be weighty; whereas it is the most barefaced falsity ever imposed upon mankind. The whole history of England disowns the fact. Thirty kings and two minors have reigned in that distracted kingdom sine the conquest, in which time there have been no less than eight civil wars and nineteen rebellions." And that was just up to the 18th century! So they were dangerous when they wielded actual power, and now useless when stripped of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 A few flag waving stalkers and Lady Di fanatics is hardly a celebration. Most people used it as a **** up. If St George's day was a Bank Holiday we could all have a **** up then. My choice would be Independance day, the day that the Heredity privilege was ended and England joined the grown up nations of the world, where every single English man and women, was born equal.That would be a great celebration....... For a dyed in the wool true blue you're seriously Republican! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 The good old days when we celebrated being British. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLqvzISwetI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 So much to celebrate about those great days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 A few flag waving stalkers and Lady Di fanatics is hardly a celebration. Most people used it as a **** up. If St George's day was a Bank Holiday we could all have a **** up then. My choice would be Independance day, the day that the Heredity privilege was ended and England joined the grown up nations of the world, where every single English man and women, was born equal.That would be a great celebration....... Absolutely agree with this. Personally I didn't notice any "coming together of the nation", it was just a good excuse to have a day off and next year's golden jubilee day off will be the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 30 April, 2011 Share Posted 30 April, 2011 Yes, it's dumb. By far Britain's most famous republican is Thomas Paine, a touchstone thinker for American Independence - hardly a hard-left socialist. His put-down of the whole idea of monarchy, particularly in Britain, still reads pretty well: "...the most plausible plea which has been offered in favour of hereditary succession is that it preserves a nation from civil wars; and were this true, it would be weighty; whereas it is the most barefaced falsity ever imposed upon mankind. The whole history of England disowns the fact. Thirty kings and two minors have reigned in that distracted kingdom sine the conquest, in which time there have been no less than eight civil wars and nineteen rebellions." And that was just up to the 18th century! So they were dangerous when they wielded actual power, and now useless when stripped of it. Tom Paine is a huge hero of mine. You have to give credit to anyone who helps incite two revolutions.....although he was rubbish at building bridges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 (edited) For a dyed in the wool true blue you're seriously Republican! I've never understood why this is perceived as a Left/Right issue. The US as a nation are amongst the most right wing people in the world, on the other side of the coin Countries like The Netherlands and Sweeden have monarchs. For me the left like to tell people how to behave,they like to rule every aspect of your life.Whereas I believe in freedom for people to decide themselves. It would be a bit bizzare to believe in a free market and then back an insitution like the Royal family. Edited 1 May, 2011 by Lord Duckhunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 Tony Bliar, Gordon (I'd like to run the IMF) Brown, David ( I've changed my mind) Cameron, Nick (who?) Clegg, Boris (I fancy that) Johnson, etc, etc. No thanks. The Royal family may be an anachronism but they are our anachronism, spare us from the self serving crooked type of people that put themselves forward as Presidents and God forbid they could be anything but a figurehead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 (edited) Tony Bliar, Gordon (I'd like to run the IMF) Brown, David ( I've changed my mind) Cameron, Nick (who?) Clegg, Boris (I fancy that) Johnson, etc, etc. No thanks. The Royal family may be an anachronism but they are our anachronism, spare us from the self serving crooked type of people that put themselves forward as Presidents and God forbid they could be anything but a figurehead. But why the need for anyone? This is not directed at you, but I do wonder whether many 'monarchist' supporters of Liz (and her half-witted offspring) have a serious mother fixation. Chuck the royals out of their palaces and vast estates, plonk them in a semi in Penge or somewhere appropriate and get the tourists into Balmoral, Buck House, etc. Edited 1 May, 2011 by Verbal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 Tony Bliar, Gordon (I'd like to run the IMF) Brown, David ( I've changed my mind) Cameron, Nick (who?) Clegg, Boris (I fancy that) Johnson, etc, etc. No thanks. The Royal family may be an anachronism but they are our anachronism, spare us from the self serving crooked type of people that put themselves forward as Presidents and God forbid they could be anything but a figurehead. Personally I don't believe we actually need a replacement for a monarchy (ie a president) as many defenders of the Royal Family have suggested they don't actually use their powers so if we replaced them with nothing then it wouldn't really make much difference would it? However if we did go down the presidential route then it would have two redeeming features - we could vote them in and we could get rid of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 I've never understood why this is perceived as a Left/Right issue. The US as a nation are amongst the most right wing people in the world, on the other side of the coin Countries like The Netherlands and Sweeden have monarchs. For me the left like to tell people how to behave,they like to rule every aspect of your life.Whereas I believe in freedom for people to decide themselves. It would be a bit bizzare to believe in a free market and then back an insitution like the Royal family. This is exactly why I like threads like this - I'll confess I would probably disagree with almost every other opinion you hold but at least we've shown we can think about issues and debate them. I'm not sure the old tags of "left" and "right" really apply anymore - certainly doesn't seem to be much "left" anymore but that's a debate for another time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaford Saint Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 The Royal House Name and the Surname are not always the same. Windsor became the official Royal Name in 1917 when King George V proclaimed it. The prior Royal House name was Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. The Queen's children have the surname Mountbatten-Windsor (when they need a surname, apparently, read the website). Mountbatten is Phillip's surname. When Charles becomes King, the Royal House name will still be Windsor (unless he changes it) but the surname Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 The Royal House Name and the Surname are not always the same. Windsor became the official Royal Name in 1917 when King George V proclaimed it. The prior Royal House name was Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. The Queen's children have the surname Mountbatten-Windsor (when they need a surname, apparently, read the website). Mountbatten is Phillip's surname. When Charles becomes King, the Royal House name will still be Windsor (unless he changes it) but the surname I think it was Battenberg before ww1 but that then became politically undesirable and they changed it to Mountbatten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 I think it was Battenberg before ww1 but that then became politically undesirable and they changed it to Mountbatten. It certainly was not. Simon Scharma would be going mental at this. You need to brush up on your history Dune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 It certainly was not. Simon Scharma would be going mental at this. You need to brush up on your history Dune. Saxe-Coburg-Gotha Folk also forget that the King, Kaiser and Czar at the outbreak of WW1 were cousins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 Saxe-Coburg-Gotha Folk also forget that the King, Kaiser and Czar at the outbreak of WW1 were cousins. Indeed the Battenberg and Mountbatten nonsense was fairly remote to the Royal Family at the outbreak of the Great War. Whilst the Battenbergs were outliers of the Royal Family (I think one of the Battenbergs married a grand-daughter of Victoria's), it was definitely distinct from the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha family. The Mountbatten connection only became entwined with the Royal Family upon mad Philip's marriage to Liz (even then he wasn't a real Mountbatten/Battenberg, as that name came from his mother's side) and the pushiness of his Uncle (dear ole Dickie, who seems on a par with the Middleton woman), behaviour which was scorned upon by many at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 It certainly was not. Simon Scharma would be going mental at this. You need to brush up on your history Dune. I'm thinking of Lord Mountbatten who was killed by the IRA. Louis of Battenberg, the great grandson of Queen Victoria, and second cousin of George V, was born in Windsor, England, on 25th June, 1900. His father, Prince Louis of Battenberg, had been born in Austria. As a result of the anti-German feelings in Britain during the First World War the family changed its name from Battenberg to Mountbatten. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWmountbatten.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 I saw a programme a while back about one of Victorias grandchilden who was shipped off to Gemany and ended up having to be against Britain in WW1, and was ostracised by the Royal family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 I saw a programme a while back about one of Victorias grandchilden who was shipped off to Gemany and ended up having to be against Britain in WW1, and was ostracised by the Royal family. Apart from the Kaiser who was Victorias Grandson (son of her namesake daughter), there were a few others fighting on the "other side" back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 And all because the young (future) Kaiser was jealous of the young (kings) fleet at a Spithead review, millions end up dying.* *Yes I know it's more complicated than that but it certainly played its part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 And all because the young (future) Kaiser was jealous of the young (kings) fleet at a Spithead review, millions end up dying.* *Yes I know it's more complicated than that but it certainly played its part. And rather than being remembered for his idea that intermarrying within the European royal dynasties would put an end to internecine continental battles, Prince Albert is instead associated (if incorrectly) with genital piercing!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 So much to celebrate about those great days Should we forgive the Germans for their crimes of sixty or seventy years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 Most of us do not even think of the Royal Family until a big event like a wedding; it has no impact on our lives. Then we just like a good old fashioned British get together. They more than pay their way and are a good thing in my opinion for us as UK PLC. Judging by the comments on here it is more about people hating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrollman no2 Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 Most of us do not even think of the Royal Family until a big event like a wedding; it has no impact on our lives. Then we just like a good old fashioned British get together. They more than pay their way and are a good thing in my opinion for us as UK PLC. Judging by the comments on here it is more about people hating. During the second world war,the King and Queen went among the suburbs of London which had just been badly bombed.The idea was because a stray bomb had hit Buckingham place,the royals could be seen as part of the people.But it backfired because they were booed throughout and had to abandon the tour. So nearly eighty years ago,the royals still were not as popular as most people would have us believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 During the second world war,the King and Queen went among the suburbs of London which had just been badly bombed.The idea was because a stray bomb had hit Buckingham place,the royals could be seen as part of the people.But it backfired because they were booed throughout and had to abandon the tour. So nearly eighty years ago,the royals still were not as popular as most people would have us believe. Yes that was borne out on VE day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 1 May, 2011 Share Posted 1 May, 2011 During the second world war,the King and Queen went among the suburbs of London which had just been badly bombed.The idea was because a stray bomb had hit Buckingham place,the royals could be seen as part of the people.But it backfired because they were booed throughout and had to abandon the tour. So nearly eighty years ago,the royals still were not as popular as most people would have us believe. Eighty years - your maths is ten years out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 2 May, 2011 Share Posted 2 May, 2011 .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 2 May, 2011 Share Posted 2 May, 2011 Should we forgive the Germans for their crimes of sixty or seventy years ago? Yet again, your responses are completely irrelevant and miss the point. The video I posted is a response to Dunes video about celebrating "empire day" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 2 May, 2011 Share Posted 2 May, 2011 Should we forgive the Germans for their crimes of sixty or seventy years ago? Forgive but not forget, you can tell by the way they methodically invade the sun lounge area around the pool that there is something wrong with their national psyche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 2 May, 2011 Share Posted 2 May, 2011 Yet again, your responses are completely irrelevant and miss the point. The video I posted is a response to Dunes video about celebrating "empire day" When are you going to be funny again? This moral self righteous stuff is all rather tedious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robsk II Posted 2 May, 2011 Share Posted 2 May, 2011 Sergei - in regards to your question about forgiving Germany - Yes. Yes we should. The vast majority of the people involved are dead, and their children have no responsibility. Furthermore, their nation as a whole has, by and large, done more soul searching and flagellation that anyone else could have done. It's time to move on. Anything else is pathetic. Do you really think we should hate the Spaniards over their attempt to attack us with the Armada? It's these entirely irrational hatreds and burdens of nationalist grudge-holding that cause many of the world's problems. The same is true elsewhere. There is no point in berating the UK now for crimes of the past - yet many in the world do. The problem is when nations keep on, and on, giving yet more reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 2 May, 2011 Share Posted 2 May, 2011 Sergei - in regards to your question about forgiving Germany - Yes. Yes we should. The vast majority of the people involved are dead, and their children have no responsibility. Furthermore, their nation as a whole has, by and large, done more soul searching and flagellation that anyone else could have done. It's time to move on. Anything else is pathetic. Do you really think we should hate the Spaniards over their attempt to attack us with the Armada? It's these entirely irrational hatreds and burdens of nationalist grudge-holding that cause many of the world's problems. The same is true elsewhere. There is no point in berating the UK now for crimes of the past - yet many in the world do. The problem is when nations keep on, and on, giving yet more reasons. Of course we should put it behind us but we should still be entitled to incorporate it into our humour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now