Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Adagietto

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 39
1
I've just put scans of my postcards of the princess online at my webshots site:

http://community.webshots.com/album/580615282wkXikm?start=0

Nothing particularly unusual because I'm too mean to pay the big prices that these often fetch nowadays!


2
"The York princesses should be put out on the royal circuit - its what their title represents, what they were born to do - not ski and jet off to the caribbean at every available opportunity."

Oh, please no! Jet them off to some remote island in the Pacific.

3
Does anyone know anything about the last Grand Duke? He seems to have a very bad repuation, but I've never heard anything specific about why that should be!

4
The Windsors / Re: Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
« on: June 10, 2011, 04:14:13 PM »
That interview was really amusing; he won't talk about himself, beyond plain statements of fact, and just batted all the questions back.

5
The Windsors / Re: Prince William and Kate Middleton
« on: December 28, 2010, 05:07:12 PM »
'William and Catherine are OK,dispite all the Nay's here.'

I agree with Greenowl, I find them unrecognizable; and I would regard the image as ugly whoever they were, the artist is simply not up to scratch. Hope they never sink to that level on coins for the UK itself.


6
The Windsors / Re: Prince William and Kate Middleton
« on: December 26, 2010, 06:21:32 AM »
That ghastly coin just seems to be for little Alderney.

7
Yes, I agree on both accounts.

8
The Hohenzollern / Re: Victoria Louise, Duchess of Brunswick Part II
« on: October 09, 2010, 07:05:00 AM »
That's one is funny, they look quite awkward.

I have the postcard of that, here is a scan of the full picture (though it doesn't show the detail as well):

9
The Hohenzollern / Re: Victoria Louise, Duchess of Brunswick Part II
« on: October 08, 2010, 05:14:04 PM »
Have we had this picture of the young VL with her mother in Venice?


10
A few pictures.




With Hindenburg:







11
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 19, 2010, 03:56:57 AM »
Well, I am certainly no Thatcherite, and I am not nationalistic in any bellicose sense. God knows, the lady has had her enemies in this country, and this idea that she deliberately provoked the invasion of the Falklands to enable her to start a war has never been advanced by any serious commentator here; at the most one occasionally stumbles across it from people sounding off on internet forums. There are so many things wrong with it that one barely knows where to start. In the first place, Mrs Thatcher herself was highly patriotic in an old-fashioned way; unimaginable that she would have enabled a foreign power (especially a South American dictatorship) to take over a British territory, detain its Governor, and assume arbitrary power over its citizens; in view of the subsequent defet of the Argentinians, it is easy to forget how mortifying this was generally felt to be in the UK, it was a national humiliation. In the second place, Mrs Thatcher was not an absolute ruler, and she had a lot of independent-minded people in her government. She could not have worked such a scheme on her own, it would have needed the co-operation of senior members of her government and probably elements in the Foreign Office too. Who exactly? Certainly not the Foreign Secretary, Lord Carrington, an honourable man whose political career was wrecked by the Falklands Affair. In fact, it is hard to think of anyone who would have gone along with such a hare-brained and utterly immoral idea, and nothing whatever has come out since to suggest that there was such a plot. Thirdly, this idea depends on the notion that the Falklands war was an easy colonial war that Britain was bound to win without significant losses. That was not the case, it was an exceedingly different operation, the British losses could easily have been much higher, it could indeed have ended in failure. It is only with hindsight, and with a good of forgetfulness of the actual course of the war, that this could be regarded as anything like an easy war. As it was, some 250 members of the Brisih forces lost their lives, and I very much doubt that the military would have told her that she could count on anything less. To suppose that Mrs Thatcher would have contemplated an appreciable loss of British lives as a way to manipulate an election implies an extraordinary misjudgement of her character. And one could go on and on. This is a classic example of a massive cock-up that could only subsequently be turned to political advantage with the benefit of a large amount of luck. And that is the general view here among people of all political affiliations.

12
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 18, 2010, 04:22:06 PM »
I was merely posting that link for people who might want to see a sensible discussion of the issues, not because it would set out to refute a contention that nobody in this country would take seriously in the first place. It is a matter of some historical interest to know how the warnings about the intentions of the Argentinians came to be ignored.

13
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 18, 2010, 08:40:35 AM »
There is a good discussion of this issue here:
http://www.barder.com/669

14
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 17, 2010, 01:02:28 PM »
Unnecessary concession, it is absurd to suppose that Mrs Thatcher would ever have enticed a foreign enemy to seize any British territory, that is a conspiracy theory about on a level of that which claims that the 9/11 atttacks were arranged by the CIA. Perhaps we need a special place in the forum for this kind of thing, comparable to the section that is devoted to the ragged army of Imperial claimants.

15
Oh, that's interesting; they seem to have been quite close friends.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 39