Friday, May 29, 2009

Whose fault was it?


There is a storm brewing up around the forthcoming 65th anniversary celebration of D-Day because of the lack of invitation to the Queen. Britain will, thus, be represented by one of the most unpopular prime ministers in modern history, Gordon Brown and there will be lots of pictures of him, President Obama and President Sarkozy. But no Her Majesty.

Not only is the Queen the Head of State in Britain and Head of the Commonwealth (ahem, who is representing the Canadians?), she is also the only living head of state who had actually served in the armed forces in World War II.

In 1945 Princess Elizabeth joined the Women's Auxiliary Territorial Service (ATS) as No. 230873 Second Subaltern Elizabeth Windsor, drove a military truck and rose to the rank of Junior Commnder. There are pictures of her in uniform; I chose one where she is actually mucking around with engines.

So who of the three self-important narcissists made the decision to insult not just the Queen but also the veterans who will be attending the ceremony? Was it President Obama, whose wife decided to treat Her Majesty as if she were a granny in an old people's home? Was it President Sarkozy, who married the luscious Carla rather hastily because she wanted to be invited to Windsor? Or was it our own Gordon Brown who is just sour enough and stupid enough to decide on such an unpopular move?

Two bloggers on Chicagoboyz have decided that it must be mostly President Obama's fault (a view that seems to be shared by other American publications such as the New Yorker).

Time Magazine thinks it was the French and find it all very amusing, though, one assumes they would be less amused if the President with his enormous entourage had been snubbed. But then his uncle (or maybe great-uncle) liberated Auschwitz (or maybe not, as that was liberated by the Red Army).

That it was the perfidious French seems to be the general assumption though, I think, they are right who consider that Sarkozy would have had the nod on it from Obama. (Sorry, but I think we can dispense with outdated titles like president.)

Me? I tend to agree with the veterans, as quoted by the Daily Mail. It was almost certainly Gordon Brown's fault. Well, it had to be. Everything else is. It seems there will be no royals at the ceremony, which means that the three narcissists can have as many photographs of themselves trying to cosy up to the veterans they are unworthy of even speaking to, as they like.


As for the Queen, I expect she will survive. She continues to be the most popular public figure in this country and hugely popular in others. And let us not forget that she, unlike venal politicians, has served this country in war and in peace. There, I have admitted it: I am an unashamed monarchist.

The other rather delightful picture is of the two princesses broadcasting from Windsor (very near London for non-British readers) to the children of Britain and the Commonwealth in October 1940, at the height of the Battle of Britain.

5 comments:

  1. As Raedwald says (http://raedwald.blogspot.com/2009/05/d-day-just-for-record.html)

    "The 6th June 1944, despite what Mr Spielberg may imagine, was, by a small margin, a British and Canadian event. That is to say, of the invasion force, some 53% were Brits and Canucks, some 46% were Septics and less than 1% 'others'. Including three or four Frenchies in a mixed Commando unit. In fact, more Poles landed on the shore of Normandy on 6th June than Frenchies."

    I don't know if those figures are accurate but if they are that is even more reason for the Queen to be there. If you've visited Normandie you will have seen the mass American graves. We must'nt forget their very high casualty rate during the landings.

    (2ndxx 3rd attempt at a comment post)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I remember that at the 60th the smelly frog bastard Shiraq kept our queen and a whole bunch of english elderly veterans waiting for over half an hour in the sun for no real reason, it looks to me like the modern generations have squandered the sacrifice and heroism of those being remembered and rendered the defeat of that branch of fascism pointless at best, I cannot express the disgust I feel towards the current crop of apologists who have enabled this travesty ,aaarrrrgggghhhh

    ReplyDelete
  3. Septic Tank, aka Yank

    low-brow nationalism is so sad. pathetic, really. do you all really have nothing better to do than moan how other people refuse to recognize your greatness...

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Helen said... Who are the Septics?"

    In my ignorance, I didn't know that. I apologise to my American friends, especially to relatives of those who gave their lives so unselfishly, so that we could live in freedom.

    ReplyDelete