Crazy Prince Philip at it again

[scandium]

Originally Posted by mog

I would say that their role in all the Commonwealth constitutional monarchies is one of checks and balances, and denying the politicians absolute power. Since all these countries are currently politically stable, it may look like the Queen does bugger all, but that doesn't mean she isn't still a vital part of the whole process.

That is correct. In both of our countries (Canada and Australia) its the Governor General, the Queen's representative, who has the power to dissolve government so that elections may be held (within a 5 year period in Canada, as prescribed by our constitution). That's in addition to her purely ceremonial duties as head of state (which frees the head of government to actually govern, rather than spend his time photo-opping).

[jumpy]

The royals might not have a great deal of relevence these days, but lets not forget the massive role they played during the war- it was very important for the populace to see the queen out an about in the land; it presented (real or otherwise, it's the result that counts) the appearence of solidarity which greatly improved moral of the average englander back then. A point which could have had far reaching consequences had things gone the other way.
Like your grandparents (mine are all now sadly moved on) who remember the war, they are from another time and place, one which doesn't really equate with todays standards and ideals. I'm no big 'royalist' but we shouldn't forget just how things were and the importance of a 'presence' so desperately needed back then.
Let's not just ****can them because they don't quite fit the modern mould. Besides, Phillip says what he feels like, I can say that there are times when I feel like opening my mouth, perhaps when I shouldn't, but I don't have the luxury of being in the position where it really doesn't matter what is said.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by mog

I would say that their role in all the Commonwealth constitutional monarchies is one of checks and balances, and denying the politicians absolute power. Since all these countries are currently politically stable, it may look like the Queen does bugger all, but that doesn't mean she isn't still a vital part of the whole process.

This can be done by much less expensive methods of employment.

Also, I've read that through the tourism industry the Royal family rakes in huge amounts of cash for the British taxpayers.

That is obvious. However, historic and architectural England would still be there to see if the royal family decides to move to Monaco tomorrow. I never went to London to see the queen! I went to see her abode. I would do the same again, whether anyone's at home or not.

Has anyone in England actually ever produced a theoretical report on the change in revenues and expenses, should this happen? That would be interesting.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

This can be done by much less expensive methods of employment.

Obviously. What you seem to not get is that the monarchy is also symbolic, part of one's national identity, and has an intrinsic value that many would find cheapened (ie: dirtied) were it to be rationalized by some bean counter looking to find a few dimes to waste on something else. Though given your outlook on national symbols, perhaps you'd be willing to auction off your own Statue of Liberty or Washington Monument to help pay off the $9 trillion US National Debt... have you considered how much "billionaire" Hugo Chavez might pay to see the Washington Monument shipped to Caracas? Surely some aspiring American Entrepreneur might be interested in converting the Statue of Liberty into the world's largest McDonald's, complete with matching scale Golden Arches to adorn the NYC skyline with. Likewise Nike would almost certainly pay huge sums to put the swoosh and "Just Do It" on the American flag... in a way it'd even be oddly fitting. Has anyone done a study to see how much revenue any of these projects could bring into the National Treasury? I don't know about anyone else, but if I were to visit NYC it would be, in part, to see the Statue of Liberty, not the enormous Ronald McDonald standing next to it.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Some of those are pretty funny. Some are insulting. There's also the utterly ugly side.

I've read this "utterly ugly" side and have found nothing attributed to him that is "utterly ugly." If anything it is simply a brutally frank and honest accounting of the period from someone who seems to feel he doesn't have anything he needs to hide.

The article, without attaching any date to the period he is referring to, attributes this to him (note that they don't bother to provide the full quote): his family found Hitler’s plans to bring Germany at the helm of European power were “attractive” and admitted they had “inhibitions about the Jews.” Notice also that he is speaking of his family and not himself and that these things are not one and the same.

Then there are the "shocking" pictures: One picture from 1937 shows Prince Philip aged 16 with relatives at his sister Cecile’s funeral in [sic] dressed in SS and Brownshirt uniforms. Lord Mountbatten, his uncle, is seen wearing a German Navy hat. More dirt tossed on his family, but again nothing on him personally.

Then this, which reads to me as only an honest and accurate depiction of these events from one who lived during them:

“There was a great improvement in things like trains running on time and building. There was a sense of hope after the depressing chaos of the Weimar Republic.

“I can understand people latching on to be something or somebody who appeared to be appealing to their patriotism and trying to get things going. You can understand how attractive it was.”


He added that there was ‘a lot of enthusiasm for the Nazis at the time, the economy was good, we were anti-Communist and who knew what was going to happen to the regime?’



Lastly we get to the meat, the only part of the article having anything to do with personally:

Philip said that he was never ‘conscious of anybody in the family actually expressing anti-Semitic views,’ but acknowledged that that there were ‘inhibitions about the Jews’ and ‘jealousy of their success.’


Again that's probably as good a way as any to honestly assess the anti-semitism that was the norm in Europe at the time. At worst he is probably guilty of a thought crime for feeling inhibited toward a minority that was marginalized and demonized (though again he seems to be speaking of his family and not himself). Is this an "utterly ugly" side of him? Hardly. Unless you also consider that he fought for the Allies in WWII "utterly ugly"; but better to ignore that part to focus instead on his thought crimes and the guilt by association that goes with being born into a Royal family and having siblings whose arranged marriages were to German Princes.

Personally I find him to be an amusing old geezer with a knack for being a little more direct and honest than some can handle. Indeed I find the quotes mog gave to be the product of a rare wit who seems to care less about political correctness. Kudos to mog

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by scandium

Personally I find him to be an amusing old geezer with a knack for being a little more direct and honest than some can handle. Indeed I find the quotes mog gave to be the product of a rare wit who seems to care less about political correctness. Kudos to mog

I'll second that. I've always viewed him as a bit of a laugh, in particular his verbal gaffs which always get jumped on by the media. I recall the event which Mog described when he was in Australia and caused uproar over his comments regarding Aborigines. He at times appears totally clueless as to the modern world in which he lives. In any case he provides light entertainment.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by Konovalov

He at times appears totally clueless as to the modern world in which he lives. In an case he provides light entertainment.

I would agree with that one.

[Godalmighty83]

we just cart him out to countries that we feel need knocking down a peg or two, its probably the sailor in him that makes him frank.

[STEED]

Couple more gaffs by Prince Philip.

On being introduced to the chairman of Britain's channel 4 television network:

"So YOU'RE responsible for the kind of crap channel 4 produces."



On French Canadians during a visit to Toronto:

"I can't understand a word they say. They slur all their words."



You got to hand it to him, he knows when to drop great clangers. :rotfl:

[STEED]

Hey he's back in a book of gaffs.

Duke of Edinburgh celebrated in book of gaffes Wednesday May 31, 02:28 PM
LONDON (Reuters) - For half a century, the blunt spoken Duke of Edinburgh has turned political incorrectness into an art form, peppering royal tours with ethnic slurs about slitty eyes, pot bellies and booze.


Now, to celebrate the prince's 85th birthday, two reporters have compiled "Duke of Hazard: The Wit and Wisdom of Prince Philip". Phil Dampier and Ashley Walton had no shortage of material.


"He really is my favourite royal," Dampier told Reuters in an interview to mark the book's

publication on Wednesday by Book Guild Publishing.

"He is one of a kind and certainly speaks his mind. I like the fact he doesn't care what people think of him. That is refreshing in this day and age. We had fun compiling it."


Buckingham Palace was not amused.


Sir Miles Hunt-Davis, the prince's private secretary, said: "If he had been as acerbic as presented in the book, he wouldn't have kept the staff that he has ... These extracts are not indicative of the man as a whole."


But Dampier said it was an affectionate portrayal, arguing: "He has a down-to-earth view of life and a magnificent sense of humour."


Asked to pick his favourite faux pas, Dampier chose Kenya's independence ceremony in 1963 when Philip represented Britain.


As the Union Jack was about to be hauled down, he turned to Kenyan independence leader Jomo Kenyatta and asked: "Are you sure you want to go through with this?"


Dampier singled out another favourite.


"In 1967 he was asked if he would like to go to Moscow to help thaw out the Cold War. He replied 'I would very much like to go to Russia -- although the bastards murdered half my family.'"


The last surviving members of the Russian royal family were allegedly executed by a Bolshevik firing squad in 1918. Philip is a direct descendant of Tsarina Alexandra who died alongside her husband Tsar Nicholas II and their children.


But no corner of the world is safe from Prince Philip.


On a trip to China in the 1980s, he warned British students: "You'll get slitty eyes if you stay too long." And while touring Australia in 2002, he asked an Aborigine whether they still threw spears at each other.


In Oban, Scotland, in 1995 he asked a driving instructor: "How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough to pass the (driving) test?"


In 1993, Philip told a Briton he met in Hungary: "You can't have been here that long -- you haven't got a pot belly."


And age certainly has not softened his tongue.


In a weekend interview with the Daily Telegraph, he complained that the opening and closing ceremonies at the Olympics were "absolute bloody nuisances."

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/31052006/80...ok-gaffes.html

:rotfl: :rotfl:

2000 Posts Drinks on me.

[squigian]

Congratulations on your promotion to the Admiralty, STEED!

[STEED]

Originally Posted by squigian

Congratulations on your promotion to the Admiralty, STEED!

For the second time, the first time was around 500 posts mark.

Thanks.