Who? 🤣
I’m rather surprised they drove from Balmoral to Edinburgh with the Queen in the Coffin/car then further road journeys planned - hope the coffin is as well insulated as a yeti cooler, imagine a road accident with queenie sliding along the road?. I wouldn’t be surprised if her actual coffin was flown down to London and held somewhere appropriate before her funeral.
She's flying from Edinburgh airport.
This is a really excellent article written in 1988 about the Queen's relationship with Margaret Thatcher. It is long but it provides a real insight into the personality of the Queen.
Here are some extracts:
She reportedly remarked that the voters of Govan had rejected the two main parties because “they have nothing – they have got nothing”, adding: “I know because I have sailed Britannia there.”
Harold Wilson – the first of her prime ministers to come from outside the traditional ruling class – established a relationship of mutual respect.
It was a joke Mrs Thatcher cannot have appreciated. According to one fellow house guest, the royal family’s compulsory after dinner games of charades left the notoriously unrelaxed prime minister “almost rigid with horror” during one of her annual visits.
On another famous trip to Balmoral, in the early 1980s, Mrs Thatcher was required to join the royal family on a picnic. A participant recalled how “afterwards the Queen insisted on washing up, in a little hut. Margaret was appalled and wanted to do it herself, but the Queen wouldn’t let her, because it was the one day of the year she can pretend to be a real person.”
And this is particularly poignant - Thatcher's husband Dennis was a notorious racist:
Mrs Thatcher is opposed to South African sanctions; the Queen is more sensitive to the feelings of Black Africa.
I knew about the strained relationship between Thatcher and the Queen but I hadn't realised just how serious and hostile it had been. And I certainly wasn't aware until I read the article that the then Prince Charles had also been pretty hostile towards Thatcher.
Love how commercial radio isn't playing adverts. LBC is actually listenable without having to mute it every 15 minutes. Long may this continue.
No Spotify ads either.
“Can you lot leave your private planes, limos, and lackeys at home please? S’alright we’re putting on a bus.”
👌
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/11/foreign-dignitaries-buses-queen-funeral
I knew about the strained relationship between Thatcher and the Queen but I hadn’t realised just how serious and hostile it had been. And I certainly wasn’t aware until I read the article that the then Prince Charles had also been pretty hostile towards Thatcher.
What a load of absolute twaddle. It's kind of deranged.
copa
Free Member
I knew about the strained relationship between Thatcher and the Queen but I hadn’t realised just how serious and hostile it had been. And I certainly wasn’t aware until I read the article that the then Prince Charles had also been pretty hostile towards Thatcher.What a load of absolute twaddle. It’s kind of deranged.
Yeah, the way that article is written most normal folk would probably back Thatcher's outlook on those stories!
A Facebook post from Billy Bragg.
It is reputedly the longest train journey in Germany - from Munich to Hamburg via Leipzig and Berlin, over seven hours travel time. That’s where I found myself on Thursday as news came through that the Queen’s doctors were ‘concerned about her health’. I was in Germany to give a couple of talks about my most recent book ‘The Three Dimensions of Freedom’ which had originally been planned for 2020. As I was explaining to my travelling companion from my Munich based publisher that the Queen had been becoming visibly frail for some time, I saw a screenshot of Huw Edwards, the BBC newscaster, wearing a black tie.
“I think we have to assume the Queen is already dead” I told my German friend. It seemed unthinkable to me that the BBC would go into mourning by mistake. The outrage that would descend on the corporation should they be seen to jump the gun on such a sensitive issue would be more damaging than any of the scandals that have beset them over the past decade.
It would be several more hours until I saw confirmation of her death, while travelling to the event in a taxi. It was interesting to be in a foreign country when the news broke. People seemed genuinely surprised, unaware that the Queen’s health recently been in decline. The taxi driver, a middle aged man, was visibly moved and spoke about how he felt when his father had died a year after the death of his mother. When I mentioned the news to the audience, there was an audible gasp of shock. Later, in my hotel room, I found that a number of German tv channels were covering the news live.
The Queen clearly meant something to these people, beyond her being the head of state of a neighbouring country.
Personally, I’ve never had strong feelings about the monarchy and the cosmetic role they play in our constitution. My concerns have always been about the way the powers which were once the sole preserve of the monarch have been conferred onto the prime minister, allowing the holder of that office to declare war and sign treaties without recourse to parliamentary debate. Hopefully the ascension of Charles III will initiate a debate about the role of the monarchy in a modern democracy, perhaps helping to kick start reforms such as the abolition of the House of Lords and a written constitution.
Having said that, I do want to take a moment to reflect on the passing of a person who has played a role in our national life over the past seven decades that is unrivalled in its significance. The importance of the Queen as a figurehead was made clear to me in 2007 when I saw a news report of the dedication of the Armed Forces Memorial, remembering those who lost their lives in conflicts since the Second World War. Watching the Queen walk along a line of ex-service personnel who had fought in every war from Korea to Afghanistan, I was struck by the thought that there is no one in British public life whose presence at an event could be equally meaningful to an 80 year old veteran as well as one in their 20s.
Obviously this is a product of the record-breaking longevity of her reign. Very few of us alive today can recall anyone else sitting on the British throne. That fact alone is what makes the notion of a King Charles III so strange and unfamiliar.
As a child, I had a great aunt who lived around the corner from us. Aunt Hannah was born in 1887 and lived in an upstairs flat that was lit by gaslight. She cooked on a coal-fired range and had neither tv nor telephone. Her only real concession to modernity was the fact that she would walk the two streets to our house to watch Sunday Night at the London Palladium. Like the Queen, she represented a living link with the past, a sense that all the things that had happened in her life could be summoned into the room by her memories. She died in 1972. By the time Elizabeth II was crowned, Aunt Hannah had lived through the reigns of six different monarchs in her 66 years. I’ve managed to rack up almost as many years without witnessing a single coronation.
For people around my age, there is another dimension that gives this moment in our history a poignancy that defies the rational concerns about crown and constitution.
Like the Queen, my parents were born in the 1920s and their formative years were shaped by the Second World War. Her father, George VI, had been Emperor of India and as a child had sat on the knee of Queen Victoria. Yet Elizabeth II represented a break with the Victorian idea of monarchy and empire. Her coronation in 1953 held the promise of a new beginning, of a world without colonies where the state supported each citizen from the cradle to the grave.
My parents were married that same year and, as part of that Elizabethan cohort, they aged along with the Queen, the great markers in their lives falling in the same span of years. They were in uniform together, they met their partners together, had children and later grandchildren together. With both my parents gone, the Queen endured as a reminder of who they were and who they became. She was their last representative, still visible in the life of our nation.
So when they bury her next week, I too will mourn - not so much for the passing of a monarch, but for the passing of a generation.
Yeah, the way that article is written most normal folk would probably back Thatcher’s outlook on those stories!
Most Tories maybe, if that's what you call normal. During the Thatcher's primership the right-wing press, especially the Murdoch owned titles, had a very hostile and critical attitude towards the Royal Family.
The Sun newspaper famously once had a front page headline "A Loon Again" above a photo of Prince Charles as they ridiculed his commitment to organ farming and the alleged claim that he liked to talk to plants.
I like Billy even more now than when I first saw him play in the mid eighties.
There is clearly something very attractive about a non-political neutral head of state in international relations, it must surely reduce feelings of bipartisan nationalism, how you achieve that in a democratic society isn’t that obvious to me.
This. During the pandemic who was setting the tone for the nation? The Queen mourning alone, or Johnson partying? How should the neutral head of state be chosen? In Greece (and Italy?) they're chosen by Parliament and in general they do a sort of ok job being neutral. Who would the UK Parliament choose? I'll give you 3 guesses and the clue that he looks and acts like an immoral scarecrow. I'm far from a Royalist but I think we're better of with King Jug Ears.
He lost a load of my respect with that pile of poo.
commitment to organ farming
oh, please don't edit 🙂
Those who believe in the Lizard people would love a bit of that!
oh, please don’t edit 🙂
No worries!
Find it hard to understand how anyone who thinks of themselves as a socialist can have no strong feelings about the monarchy.
At the heart of a democracy, you have an aristocratic family who enjoy lives of extreme wealth and privilege for no reason other than they were born into it.
And this is something that should not just be tolerated, it should be aggressively celebrated. That these people should be worshipped and idolised. And that any attempts to question any of this should be avoided/shouted down.
It cements the basic idea that some people/classes are born to have better lives than others. That inequality is not something we should try to change. It's something we should rejoice in.
I bet HMRC can't wait to get their hands on 40% of the Queen's personal wealth.
Oh no wait...
More arrests for having an opinion on the King and expressing it (not the place and time).
He lost a load of my respect with that pile of poo
Why? He's talking about the end of an era not that he's a pro monarchist. I'm sure he's still an upstanding socialist.
My ancestors were persecuted by the genocidal English then British ruling classes but I don't share yours and others here level of bitterness.
Still cant believe that Our KING is a leading member of the WEF and just how much of a worry this organisation is to our society . The media needs to dig in and the public almost demand that the WEF meetings are made fully public .For the level of power they hold they are beyond powerful.... As for the QUEEN, she was and always will be the worlds greatest "Super model" no lady has ever dressed so well .
Yey... a new one...! What we really need right now is someone reminding us about this stuff from the dark corners of the internet. The WEF is the latest fun to hate dark force controlling everything, isn't it.
anyone who thinks of themselves as a socialist can have no strong feelings about the monarchy.
Because in the grander scheme of things the monarchy is a blip, abolish it and send a message by all means, but any money saved will make little difference to people who need support. It's a distraction from the bigger issues in society like wages not keeping pace with the cost of living, corporate tax, costs of Brexit, idiotic energy policy, etc.
Fix some of those issues and it might actually have a significant impact on peoples standard of living.
I’m sure he’s still an upstanding socialist.
I'm not sure if that comment was made with me in mind but if it was I think you might have got the wrong end of the stick - unless TJ has dramatically changed his opinion in the last day or so!
We have been exchanging private messages concerning this thread as TJ sometimes feels that he has to walk away from threads. Nothing he has said to me in those messages suggests that he doesn't respect my opinion. On the contrary, he has himself pointed out that my opinion of the monarchy is very much in line with those of Jeremy Corbyn.
Of course he might have changed his mind since Saturday, in which case he will undoubtedly let us know!
BBC (Radio4 World at One) getting very excited about how fast the King can get from Westminster to Holyrood.
Yey… a new one…! What we really need right now is someone reminding us about this stuff from the dark corners of the internet. The WEF is the latest fun to hate dark force controlling everything, isn’t it.
It’s a go to bête noire for anyone who’s favourite phrases are ‘do your own research’ and ‘living off grid’.
Because in the grander scheme of things the monarchy is a blip, abolish it and send a message by all means, but any money saved will make little difference to people who need support.
I don't think it is. It's not about the money.
It's hard to tackle any real problems in a state that worships a totem of inequality.
And of course all Republics are fair and free economies with no corruption, inequality, wrong 'uns or owt like that - bring on the revolution! 🙂
Just watch any Simon Reeve series to see how corrupt and unequal a nation can really be.
Now may be the time to seriously discuss the need for a Royal family. Well leave it after the funeral at least!
And the Scandinavian countries often held up as leaders in the way they treat their people fairly still have Royal families.
I may regret asking this, but WTF is WEF?
And the Scandinavian countries often held up as leaders in the way they treat their peaple fairly still have Royal families.
And Sweden's on the verge of a right wing/far right government.
ceremony of the keys done.
"Here are the keys to your city. There's a £10 deposit if you lose them. And no shitey english money, either"
"In that case, you keep hold of them. There's no pockets in this morning suit anyway"
I may regret asking this, but WTF is WEF?
It's where our reptilian overlords meet. It includes Labour Party politicians.
Billy Bragg's article makes a number of valid points; most importantly that the Queen's death represents the end of a generation.
R4 merely observed that the schedule dictated to and being followed by Charles is hectic; nothing in the reporting to indicate they were very excited.
As for a state worshipping a totem of inequality, that statement is a nonsense; it doesn't apply to the population in general. If the reference was to the executive, legislative and judiciary that should have been made clear.
nothing in the reporting to indicate they were very excited
BBC sounds is there for people to judge for themselves, it was very odd reporting.
Cahrr. Im not bitter at all. Dunno where you get that from.
I think thr royal family are outdated and have no place in a modern democracy. Of course in the uk we do not have a modern democracy but i would like us to have one.
As for that bragg piece he imo has spectacularly missed a fundamental point. Bread and circuses and that the monarchs role is far more than ceremonial. They have real power and weild it to interfere in the democratic process
Still cant believe that Our KING is a leading member of the WEF and just how much of a worry this organisation is to our society . The media needs to dig in and the public almost demand that the WEF meetings are made fully public .For the level of power they hold they are beyond powerful…. As for the QUEEN, she was and always will be the worlds greatest “Super model” no lady has ever dressed so well .
Well, think yourself lucky that kelvin didn't tell you to calm down and have a cup of chamomile tea! My mentioning of climate change and WEF puppet was most definitely not appreciated by him. Do hope everyone enjoys this theatre which the public can be a part of if they so wish. Personally, my eyes are wide open as this is the perfect opportunity for the Government to sneakily push through anything that does not benefit the public. Never trust a Tory.
a cup of chamomile tea!
God no! Proper tea, decaf if need be, but none of that chamomile stuff… bleurgh!
the Government to sneakily push through anything that does not benefit the public
Might be a bit late for that...
https://twitter.com/SpeechUnion/status/1569073325141377026
(edited with fresh tweet, as the one with the uncensored pic was apparently too spicy for the sensitive folk of this family forum)
let's just hope they're lenient, given the powers available for prosecution...
A 165-year-old law that threatens anyone calling for the abolition of the monarchy with life imprisonment is technically still in force – after the Ministry of Justice admitted wrongly announcing that it had been repealed.
The Treason Felony Act 1848 has been the subject of repeated legal confusion this century. It was the subject of a high court challenge by the Guardian in 2003. This week, in a footnote to a list of new offences, the MoJ said the powers in section 3 of the Act had finally been swept away in a belated, legislative pruning of unwanted laws.
The act – which makes it a criminal offence, punishable by life imprisonment, to advocate abolition of the monarchy in print, even by peaceful means – has not been deployed in a prosecution since 1879.
The Ministry of Justice said: "Section 3 of the Treason Felony Act 1848 has not been repealed. The Ministry of Justice has removed this publication and is reviewing its contents."
That means in theory that to "imagine" overthrowing the Crown or waging war against the Queen, as the wording of the act describes, could still result in a life sentence.
Sprinkle a dusting of the recent Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 in for good measure and blame Orwell for inspiring the python of state to new levels of constriction
A woman who held an “abolish monarchy” sign at a proclamation ceremony for King Charles III has been charged with a criminal offence.
Any facts about what the alleged offence is that she has (allegedly) been charged with - could be shoplifting, assaulting a police officer or holding up a cardboard sign? That statement is wilfully vague and could be misinterpreted by the easily led.
As a white person in the UK , I find it amazing what "others" are allowed to say and have on banners etc And the Police do all then can NOT to arrest them .The Queen stood for Freedom. This is NOt Thailand . People all too quick to be offended these days
Who are these “others”? And what can they say that you can’t? Welcome to the forum.
Any facts about what the alleged offence is that she has (allegedly) been charged with
According to the Independent :
Police Scotland said a 22-year-old woman had been arrested outside St Giles' Cathedral in Edinburgh on Sunday “in connection with a breach of the peace”.
“She was charged and was released on an undertaking to appear at Edinburgh Sheriff Court at a later date,” a spokesperson added.
The woman was holding a sign reading “f*** imperialism, abolish monarchy”, but the sign is not understood to be the reason for her arrest.
Although jivehoneyjive's 165 treason law sounds far more dramatic and interesting, so I would go with that.
Thanks Ernie - I've been 'doing my own research' and notice that the legendary Jedward twins also tweeted 'abolish the monarchy' on 10th sep, so I'm now tempted to press for that old law to be invoked too.
If the energy crisis continues, everyone will be saying 'abolish the monarchy', so they can live a life of subsidized comfort at HM's pleasure...
(not quite the same as a pleasurable life of subsidized comfort mind 😁)
https://twitter.com/Spacejunc/status/1568037913383866370
the legendary Jedward twins also tweeted ‘abolish the monarchy’ on 10th sep, so I’m now tempted to press for that old law to be invoked too
Were they in Ireland? Being Irish and all. Does the law reach to there?
Couldn't they just send a drone or some such and dispense with all that archaic due process... that said, with all the imperial history that's been dragged up by the former colonies, maybe the optics would be better if our friends on the other side of the pond handled the mission!
Of course, we could still profit what with all the contacts Charles and Andrew have amassed in the industry over the years... might even be a good demo of BAE's new systems, ready to sign a lucrative contract
