BBC: Obama wants Queen at D-Day event
The White House spokesman the other day was all in favour of the French inviting Queen Elizabeth to Normandy for the 65th anniversary commemoration of the D-Day Normandy invasion to liberate Europe and to defeat the Nazis.

It is daft for the US to want the Queen invited, to anything! Stupid!

Obama is going to this D-day event on the coast of France. Sarkozy's going. Brown is going. Apparently there has been some mix up leading to no timely invite for the Queen. Good! She should be banned from attending - as should all members of the UK royal family.

The Queen should not be invited.

Americans have got monarchy to blame for the Al Qaeda 9/11 attacks provoked, encouraged or otherwise caused by monarchs and dictators in "Muslim" countries.

The Queen's Uncle Edward, the Duke of Windsor and ex-King was a Nazi sympathiser who is thought to have spied and leaked to the Nazis the deployments of the French forces which enabled the Wehrmacht to penetrate the Maginot line through the Ardennes and led ultimately to the fall of France.

Queen Elizabeth's husband Philip - his sister married a Nazi SS Colonel.

The monarchy is the enemy - they hate democracy and republics which have no need of royalty and the royals love and support what the Nazis did to their German republican critics - exterminate them as they would exterminate us if they could.

So wake up America!

Stop inviting the Queen to things! The worst was when Bush invited the Queen to the White House!

The Queen's predecessors as monarchs allowed the sabotaging of the British army to the point where we could not even easily defend our nearest and best ally France.

All the deaths of WW2 have to be blamed on the UK monarchy for allowing a British world power built not on monarchy but on the genius of the industrial revolution to fall into disrepair and disorganisation and ending up as a runt hapless army that got kicked out of Europe at Dunkirk.

The industrial revolution should have been followed by a republican revolution so the British military would have become a republican force for democracy world-wide as the US military is today.

To keep Britain as a Kingdom was to sabotage the British army long term, so even admitting that the Queen changed the wheels on a few army trucks in World War 2, the whole army was and is today still weakened by monarchy.

So that makes the Queen and her family traitors.

If the royals want to help the British military today then they should go into exile.

Well it looks like instead of the traitor Queen Elizabeth, her traitor son, the Traitor Prince Charles will be allowed to attend the D-day event - just as bad, just as stupid.

BBC: Charles invited to D-Day events

__________________
Peter Dow's Scottish National Standard Bearer website
and check my profile here for a visitor message I posted which summarizes my core politics.

Really? Haven't heard so much supersillious, bombastic, syncopant, diatribe in a long, long time...

__________________
A kind word is like a Spring day ....

__________________
Farewell my beautiful Gracie Baby:
15th Jan 1997- 18 Jul 2009

Mak's Blog - Updated 27/1/10

I think I may actually be agreeing with you!

__________________

so am I. The OP is a well known pain in the neck on any forums which are overtly political or in some way connected to Scotland. I think he holds the world record for being banned in less than 10 posts.

He suffers from mental illness, so can't really be blamed for all his actions. The fact that he's psychotic, with no insight into his illness, means he regularly defaults on his medication. Which, in turn, results in the complete bloody nonsense in the OP.

__________________
They make a desolation and they call it peace........

I should remind you Peter Dow that during the second world war, Princess Elizabeth as the Queen was then, served in the army as a driver. Also, that she IS the head of State in the UK.

Get back on your medication Peter

__________________
The Bluebell of Scotland is hanging her head,
The Lion, once rampant, is lying like dead.

Yup. She's earned the right to attend on behalf of the almost 400,000 UK soldiers who gave their lives. It was very disrespectful to leave her off the invite list.

__________________
Farewell my beautiful Gracie Baby:
15th Jan 1997- 18 Jul 2009

Mak's Blog - Updated 27/1/10

Well thank you, I think, for your replies.

I have to say though that questioning my state of mental health or calling for me to be banned is not the best way to encourage me to respond to points so those posters who have made Ad Hominem personal attacks against me should not expect me to reply personally but rather I will attempt to address points impersonally.

I note that no-one seems to have disputed the facts of the connections between Queen Elizabeth's family and the Nazis. It all smells a bit fishy don't you think?


Wikipedia: Prince Christoph of Hesse
Wikipedia: Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom. Marriage
American Almanac: The Nazi Roots of the House of Windsor
Aftermath News: The Nazi relative that the Royals disowned
The Daily Express: PRINCE PHILIP AND THE NAZIS
The Royals and the Reich. The Princes von Hessen in Nazi Germany by Jonathan Petropoulos



Jonathan Petropoulos, in his book "Royals and the Reich" reviews the case that the Duke of Windsor was a traitor and an agent for Nazi Germany which was made by Martin Allen in his book "Hidden Agenda. How the Duke of Windsor Betrayed the Allies".


Is anyone disputing that the UK, in the run up to world war 2, had allowed the British Army to fall into such a state of disrepair and disorganisation that it was defeated and kicked out of Europe by the Nazis at Dunkirk in May/June 1940?

Did Britain have a darkest hour or not, and who were the heads of state responsible for that darkest hour - UK monarchs and UK royalists who run the state, perhaps, or British Presidents and British republicans, out of power since the time of Cromwell?

Who saved Britain and the free world from the Nazis in the world war 2? Did republican USA join the war and save us, or was it the King of America who defeated Hitler?

On 9/11 and Al Qaeda, do Al Qaeda recruit their terrorist followers mainly from rotten Arab and "Muslim" country monarchies, dictatorships and failing states or do they recruit from Arab and "Muslim" democratic republics I wonder?

Now in case someone is tempted to say that Pakistan is now a democratic republic, I would remind you that for many years Pakistan has been a rotten military dictatorship which originally supported the Taliban and Sharia Law with the idea of consolidating political support amongst religious conservatives in opposition to the political forces of liberal democracy.

These are the facts ladies and gentlemen - monarchy and dictatorship is a rotten way to run a country and a rotten way to fight a war - and simply abusing me and ignoring the facts cannot change this.

__________________
Peter Dow's Scottish National Standard Bearer website
and check my profile here for a visitor message I posted which summarizes my core politics.

The armed forces, like most of the armed forces of europe (including republican France) were very outdated at the start of WWII - there is no doubt about that. Following 'the war to end all wars', few anticipated another global conflict so soon. There was a general lack of preparation for the military rise of Germany across Europe. You can hardly blame the King of England for that!

Yes, there were links between some Nazis and some members of the royal family (that is not disputed by anyone, shouldn't be news to anyone), as there had been strong family links between the King and Kaiser bill in the previous war. Some suspect some members of the royal family (and one in particular) of having Nazi sympathies, but few think that it was general throughout the family - the one maoin suspected sympathiser was very much a remote figure on the fringe of things by that point in time.

Using Cromwell as an example of great British 'Republicanism' or upstanding leadership is not really a great idea for your case. Although some like to paint the Civil War as a battle between 'Royalist authoritarians' and 'Parliamentary repulbican libertarians, standing up for democracy and a change from the old ways of dictatorship', that really is a long, long way from the truth - it is a complete and clear misunderstanding of history, often made by those who are not well educated in the real events in, and reasons for, the civil war. Cromwell became one of the most brutal dictators in post-Medieval British history, and was not really any more minded towards such concepts as 'democracy', 'freedom for the people' or 'power to the people' than Longshanks!

The monarch and 'Head of State' is more or less a ceremonial figurehead, and has been for centuries. While they have some political influence, and the ear of the PM, they have no real effective power. The power clearly rests with parliament, and mostly with the House of Commons, which is elected by the people. The state of the armed forces before WWII was the responsibility of parliament, not the monarch - although it was a general problem across the continent, it is parliament that failed in that respect, not the 'Head of State', who does not (and did not pre-WWII) decide military funding levels, strategic priorities, planning or development.

The only 'power' (although it was very much decided by parliament in practise) that the Monarch did have was the act of actually declaring war, which he duly did when Nazi Germany invaded Poland.

__________________