144 2 mins 14 yrs

queenelizabethii.jpgIt appears that at least some Irish people are objecting to a potential visit to the Republic from Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth next year. It looks like Bertie Ahern is organising a Royal visit as it just one more way of normalising relationships between the UK and the Republic. I have no problem, in fact given the frequency with which Irish President Mary McAleese visits Northern Ireland, I think the Queen should be travelling to the Republic on a weekly basis, spreading joy and goodwill – just like Mary Mary quite contrary does! But, sad to say, the diehard Republicans can’t stomach a visit by The Queen and so we read Des Dalton, vice-president of Republican Sinn Fein – dissidents who left mainstream Sinn Fein – said the splinter group "will be to the forefront in opposing such a visit, as we are in opposing the ongoing campaign to normalise English rule in Ireland".

Poor Des – he’s completely cut off from reality, isn’t he? Living on Planet Bigotry – forever doomed to live in the past!

Look, I can think of nothing more natural than the head of the British State paying a visit to our closest neighbour. Who knows – perhaps when the Irish people see the magnificence that surrounds Britain they will see the error of their republican ways and demand to rejoin the British commonwealth  😉

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

144 thoughts on “NO QUEEN HERE?

  1. David,

    I thought they dropped the British part of the Commonwealth from the title?

    The visit of the Queen is a neccessary thing I suppose. Maybe she should bring the family. You can’t get too much magnificence.

  2. Des Dalton is a nobody in Ireland and speaks for nobody.

    To paraphrase the old song: The Queen she’ll come to call on us, she’ll be wantin’ to see all of us..

    (I love honorific titles, and after Her Majesty QEII, His Holiness Pope Benedict, His Eminence Sean Cardinal Brady, I propose His Normalness Bertie Ahern, Her Passivity Mary McAleese, His Self-Importance Bono, His Delinquency Martin McGuinness.

  3. Des Dalton

    Never heard of em. Not read this any where in the Irish media

    As regards a visit from the Queen Elizabeth, im sure RSF and SF themselves will object, but the majority wont take the same attitude. Ive no problem with another head of state visiting. The British royal family sell a lot of copy in Ireland.

  4. "Poor Des – he’s completely cut off from reality, isn’t he? Living on Planet Bigotry – forever doomed to live in the past!"

    *ahem*

  5. "Am I a bigot? Really? "

    NO NO NO but how many times has it been said here you were living in the past. I just thought it was a little ironic.

  6. But I do not live in the past. I live in Donacloney, which admittedly is somewhat behind the modern age!

    OK – I take your point my values and principles may seem old-fashioned to some but unlike poor deluded Mr Dalton, I can at least see the the UK and Republic should aim for good relations!!

  7. It will be a little strange but it’s about time it happened as part of the normalisation process between Britain and Ireland.

    Anyway, herself and President Mac seem to get on famously.

  8. I think the head of state of or nearest neighbour should be made very welcome – the vast majority of people I know here in Dublin would think the same – but those far left splinter Marxist whaddyacallems will always make noise. Most of them have nothing else to do between signing on and getting a weekly 194.80 at the taxpayer’s expense as most of that lot do.

    Ignore them David! – They are akin to the socialist workers in Britain – extreme and irrelevant.
    But as for "Who knows – perhaps when the Irish people see the magnificence that surrounds Britain they will see the error of their republican ways and demand to rejoin the British commonwealth ;-)"

    I think most people, while agreeing that the Queen herself seems like decency embodied – they find her family, the idea of a hereditary monarchy and the cost to the taxpayer as horrendous.

    It certainly makes me feel grateful that we live in a Republic with one rule for all, and nobody bowing to nobody!!!

    On a related topic – will Charles be allowed to become head of the COI and King when QEII dies or will his admitted adultery be an obstacle when the time comes?
    I find it hard to understand how such a seemingly decent and dutiful woman could produce such an amoral imbecile for a son.

  9. >>will his admitted adultery be an obstacle when the time comes?<<

    If adultery was an obstacle to becoming British monarch, the UK would have been a republic throughout the 17th, 18th and a lump of the 19th centuries.

  10. "If adultery was an obstacle to becoming British monarch, the UK would have been a republic throughout the 17th, 18th and a lump of the 19th centuries"

    In reality there was adultery, I accept that – but i’m not aware of any cases in the centuries you have mentioned where adultery was proven and certainly not any cases of an Heir admitting to adultery and then going on to marry the woman with whom the adultery was committed and then going on to be King and head of the COE !

  11. Noel I think d4 was talking about "admitted adultery" which, as we all know is a very different thing to adultery !!

  12. "The comedians enter the room."

    Mary is hardly anything to boast about, nor the Mary before her. The office of president is not what it used to be. The queen can still turn out a good crowd – and in all fairness she is held in high regard by a lot of people.

  13. "Mary is hardly anything to boast about, nor the Mary before her. The office of president is not what it used to be."

    Typhoo,

    I couldn’t disagree more. For all her faults, Robbo made the Office relevant. Mary Mac has continued in this vein (with none of her predecessors overt politicking).

  14. "Mary is hardly anything to boast about, nor the Mary before her"

    I think you’ll find typhoo that both Women have a huge amount to their credit – including being hugely accomplished academically and both having been democratically elected to mention but two.

    Why choose to start slagging of the Head of State of another country??? That sounds very much like something Eirigi, Or RSF or whatever would do !

    Strange.

  15. Mary is hardly anything to boast about, nor the Mary before her

    Typhoo,

    Since that was a response to my comment, ill address it. First of, I havent talked up Mary Mc, nor have I talked down the British Queen, I merely responded to Maggies Irish put down.

  16. "Why choose to start slagging of the Head of State of another country???"

    Me? I’m Irish, I may be classed as a British subject, because the majority of the people here say so, but that doesn’t make me British.

    "I think you’ll find typhoo that both Women have a huge amount to their credit – including being hugely accomplished academically and both having been democratically elected to mention but two."

    And that has done what for Ireland exactly? Isn’t the going rate something like £1,000 or its equavilent in Euro?? They certainly cost enough.

  17. Kloot, I understand. We can slag of the queen, and the British political class, but keep your negative comments about anything in the republic to yourself??

  18. "And that has done what for Ireland exactly? Isn’t the going rate something like £1,000 or its equavilent in Euro?? They certainly cost enough"

    Please reveal with just a tad more clarity what on earth this comment relates to.

    What costs £1000 ??

    Strange.

  19. D4,

    Haven’t heard of Eirigi in a while!!

    They may talk utter shite but they’re the kings of stencil-graffiti!

    Apart from Hyde (more for symbolism than anything else) and O’Dailigh (bravely doing his constitutional duty – a shame he resigned in a fit of pique), the two Mary’s are the best we’ve ever had. Previously it was merely a retirement posts for old men.

  20. "Typhoo – who here on this thread has "slagged off" your Queen??"

    Thats no problem for me I like the old girl, but maggie was called a comedian for her support. I don’t think anyone who supports the queen is a comedian – there only being loyal to what they see as their britishness.

    Nothing wrong or comical about that.

  21. "Apart from Hyde (more for symbolism than anything else) and O’Dailigh (bravely doing his constitutional duty – a shame he resigned in a fit of pique), the two Mary’s are the best we’ve ever had. Previously it was merely a retirement posts for old men."

    I couldn’t agree more Reg.

    As for Eirigi – still around I believe organising the occasional press release and hoping for revolution through stencilling !!

    Any day now I expect there will be splinter groups like ‘eirigi nua’ or ‘eirigi aris’ or maybe even ‘The real eirigi’ !!

  22. Come on Typhool – enlighten us – what did you mean when you said:

    ""And that has done what for Ireland exactly? Isn’t the going rate something like £1,000 or its equavilent in Euro?? They certainly cost enough""

    What costs £1000 ???

  23. Kloot, I understand. We can slag of the queen, and the British political class, but keep your negative comments about anything in the republic to yourself??

    Your comment was directed at me! wasnt it. Please find where in any of my comments here that ive slagged either the Queen, The British political classes or anything else British. Im at a complete loss as to what your on about.

    Thats no problem for me I like the old girl, but maggie was called a comedian for her support.

    ehh.. now theres a misinterpretation if ever there was one. I called maggie a comedian for her put down of the Irish. Are you saying that the only way Maggie could support her queen was through a put down of the Irish. Ive no problem at all with the British Queen, read my comments above to see that. And she is more then welcome to the ROI. To be honest its been on the cards for years and long over due. But dont expect me not to respond to comments that want to portray the ROI in a bad light.

  24. Come on Typhool – enlighten us – what did you mean when you said:

    ""And that has done what for Ireland exactly? Isn’t the going rate something like £1,000 or its equavilent in Euro?? They certainly cost enough""

    What costs £1000 ???

    In reference to what they are paid. Are you saying they do it voluntarialy?

  25. "As for Eirigi – still around I believe organising the occasional press release and hoping for revolution through stencilling !!"

    Bless their cotton socks!

  26. >>- but i’m not aware of any cases in the centuries you have mentioned where adultery was proven and certainly not any cases of an Heir admitting to adultery and then going on to marry the woman with whom the adultery was committed and then going on to be King and head of the COE<<

    It’s a tall order, D4, I admit, but not too tall for the scions of the House of Hanover or their precursors, some of whom managed exactly that.

    Almost all the princes of that time had affairs, and a lot of current British petty royals owe their position to some regal romp in a Stuart or Hanoverian bed (including the current Camilla, I believe).
    If you threw a stone at some royal gathering around the beginning of the 18th C, the chances were that you’d hit one of Charles II’s bastards.

    But actually even the current Queen Elisabeth owes her crown to a spot of adultery (which may be why she’s rather indulgent of Charles. This incidentally also shows up your comparison, Typhoo, for what it is: the Irish Presidents were both born with the status of the rest of us, and got to where they got through their own merit, not through some propitious ejaculation).

    You see, the Queen’s father (and through him the Queen) only became 1st in line when Edward abdicated, which he did after his adultery with Wallis Simpson (who was a divorcee but still married to her 2nd) became too much of a scandal. Edward did, however, become King and head of the COE while an adulterer.

    And more power to him, say I.

  27. Oh, right I see, You were qeustioning the remuneration the President recieves.

    No, I don’t believe they do it voluntarily and are paid salaries comparable to other elected Heads of state, which is a little bit more than £1000 thankfully !

    I’m quite sure that given President Mc Aleese’s previous position and qualifications she could earn at least the same of not a greater salary in either the private sector or academia.

    I’m sure her motivation in running for election was not so much the salary as the honour of serving as President and getting to represent Ireland.

    Your point makes no sense.

  28. Kloot

    "But dont expect me not to respond to comments that want to portray the ROI in a bad light"

    If maggie wants to put it down good luck to her, don’t know what there is to boast about. Considering the british can give their own hell for leather, maybe you guys could take a leaf out of their book.

    This is a dissenting blog I thought, where does it say the dissent was only for the british. THe ROI is perfectly entitled to be criticised and put down, same as all the others, if you’re expecting praise for the republic, I fear you’ll be disappointed.

  29. "I’m quite sure that given President Mc Aleese’s previous position and qualifications she could earn at least the same of not a greater salary in either the private sector or academia."

    I didn’t think Queens university paid its lecturers that sort of money. Aren’t they going on strike soon for more money and better conditions.

  30. ‘there only being loyal to what they see as their britishness’.

    I think Maggie was responding to the Irish put down on which the post is based.

  31. This is a dissenting blog I thought, where does it say the dissent was only for the british. THe ROI is perfectly entitled to be criticised and put down, same as all the others, if you’re expecting praise for the republic, I fear you’ll be disappointed.

    Throws eyes to heaven…. ok, your just not getting this. The blog piece is on the Queen visiting the ROI and objections from some republican associations. Maggies one and only comment was to say that she was too good for the lot of the ROI. Thats the comment im addressing, and you appear to be backing her to the hilt. The ROI is far from being above comment and criticism, I engage in enough of it myself. But do you really believe maggies comment was fair. Because I dont. If you do, then say so and we can debate it, if you dont then say so are were in agreement. Personally, I dont understand why and adult would make such a childish throw away comment in a adult blog.

  32. Noel – I see your point – however I was talking about ‘admitted adultery’ which is much the same as adultery which has been proven in court. A very different thing.

    Also – Edward wasnot married at the time of his affair with the divorced Mrs. Simpson, both were legally single and yet he was forced to abdicate when he announced his intention to marry her!

    Charles was still married when he admitted adultery on television. He then went on to divorce his wife and later on to marry his mistress.

    My original question still stands – will he still get to become King and head of the COE when QEII passes away?

  33. Typhoo –

    I don’t think anyone who supports the queen is a comedian – there only being loyal to what they see as their britishness.

    Sadly, you’re right. Poor, deluded fools that many are, they don’t realise she’s the most disastrous monarch in our history.

    Please, Ireland, welcome her with open arms. Just don’t let her leave.

  34. Noel Cunningham –

    Why do you imply that Her Majesty wasn’t born with the same status as any Subject of the Crown?

  35. "But do you really believe maggies comment was fair."

    Thats not the issue. She has a right to say it without being called a comedian, and I’ll defend her right to say it.

    "Personally, I dont understand why and adult would make such a childish throw away comment in a adult blog."

    Maggie and I have our differences believe me, but she is perfectly entitled to say what she likes without it being called commical or childish. Shes a very good commentator with some very good views, plus she is allowed to say what she feels.

  36. Typhoo,

    "The queen can still turn out a good crowd – and in all fairness she is held in high regard by a lot of people."

    You do appreciate of course that the same was true of any number of despots now and in the past? It’s hardly a true recommendation.

  37. Sadly, you’re right. Poor, deluded fools that many are, they don’t realise she’s the most disastrous monarch in our history.

    Now there is an interesting point. Its only very recently that Ive began to understand the role that Pete is describing for the British monarch. Im far from having a full grasp on it, but I can understand where Pete is coming from. Today, it appears that the monarchy is used for PR and tourism purposes. Its almost unthinkable that the Queen would publicly make know any objections she may have with government.

  38. >>Edward wasnot married at the time of his affair with the divorced Mrs. Simpson, both were legally single <<

    No, D4. When Edward became king, the American Mrs. Simpson was still married to her 2nd husband. I’m not sure about the legal technicalities, but according to the Penny Cathecism, he commits adultery who either bonks with another when married or with one who is married.
    Edward went on to marry his lover afterwards, so Charles is really just following in a family tradition, and I don’t see why it can’t happen. I suppose, however, that the positions of monarch and head of the Church of England will soon be separated, and not before time.

  39. "Sadly, you’re right. Poor, deluded fools that many are, they don’t realise she’s the most disastrous monarch in our history."

    Pete – Why do you believe that she’s the most disastrous monarch in your history?

    Is that not a bit strong??

    The UK seems to be doing good – very high GNP, democracy, rule of law, Health service etc

    And besides – I thought her role was mostly ceremonial.

    What has she done wrong in your opinion??

  40. "You do appreciate of course that the same was true of any number of despots now and in the past?"

    AAAHHH!!! Theres always someone Dawkins who will see a side of things totally unintended. LOL In this case its you.

  41. Thats not the issue. She has a right to say it without being called a comedian, and I’ll defend her right to say it.

    She is of course entitled to have her view. I havent called for the comment to be deleted or censored in anyway. I used a light term, "Commedian" to describe her attitude, I could have used worse. I commented on it as I am entitled to. The comment is out there and im responding.

    Maggie and I have our differences believe me, but she is perfectly entitled to say what she likes without it being called commical or childish.

    Are you saying people can make comment without derisory comment in return. Now thats a weird stance to take. You open yourself up to past and future criticism here.

    So maggie could call the Queen a fool and you would offer no comment. Strange attitude to take.

  42. D4 –

    Sadly, we will have Charles III (although he has indicated he’ll plump for the regnal ‘George VII’) instead of leaping to his fine son, the future William V.

    He will also become Head of the Church of England, Defender of the Faith, a role indivisible and indistinguishable from that of Sovereign (although the monarch has been suzerein and not sovereign since 1972, if you follow.)

    However, immature hippy that he is, Charles has indicated that he would like to become Defender of the Faiths, recognising the growing number of foreign heathens in Britain.

    Clearly, this is a ridiculous proposition. The Constitution and Coronation Oath are each clear. For Charles to be crowned he must declare the Coronation Oath, and for him to become Defender of the Faiths he must break the Oath, although this hasn’t stopped his mother from doing likewise.

    He seems not to have considered the views of all other Christians, the Jews, muslims, hindoos, buddhists, zoroastrians and Jedi. Most would be quite cool no doubt, but we know what the reaction of the camel jockey community will be. A plane couldn’t get Rage Boy here fast enough.

    But anyhow, ‘yes’ and ‘yes’ are the straightforward answers.

  43. Kloot that is a totally wrong interpetation of what I said. By calling her a comedian, and then inferring it wasn’t adult you made it personal. Lite comment or not, I felt I wanted to respond to it, and I did. You of course are free to respond back.

  44. >>She has a right to say it without being called a comedian, and I’ll defend her right to say it.<<

    Typhoo, by the same token anyone has a right to call her a commedian and "I’ll defend his right to say it" blah blah

    I really think you should wait until Troll starts posting his pieces before commenting.

    >>Why do you imply that Her Majesty wasn’t born with the same status as any Subject of the Crown?<<

    Pete, well obviously because she was born with the title of Princess, which brought with it automatic funding from the public purse, many other prerogatives and properties and a position in the line of succession, which in her case made her in time titutlar head of state.
    While she was a great young woman at the time, all of this came automatically and didnt depend in any way on her efforts.

  45. Pete
    when you said QEII is the most disastrous – why so???

    What is so wrong?

    And I thought the role was mostly ceremonial like our President’s role??

  46. "Its almost unthinkable that the Queen would publicly make know any objections she may have with government"

    And why do you suspect that is Kloot? Think about it

  47. Kloot that is a totally wrong interpetation of what I said. By calling her a comedian, and then inferring it wasn’t adult you made it personal.

    Typhoo, Im not sure how many other blogs you visit, so ill give you my explanation of the "adult" comment.

    I do not need to define my pride in being Irish, by putting down the population of another state, nor the head of another state. Im perfectly happy in defending my Irishness on its merits.

    One of the reasons I visit ATW more often then others is that silly, childish, throw away comments of the form "My house is nicer then yours" are not the norm. These are the type of debates that occur on other sites, that are so bloody childish and often enough come from people with very little self education on the matters to hand, that reading those blogs, threads becomes unappealing. Hence, I used the "adult" word, because an adult debate should not descend into that farce.

  48. I see. Kloot. Let me be clear about this. Are you saying that maggie is childish, comical ane now lacks education?

    Is it really a sign of education to comment on the lack of it in others? Are you engaging in a little intelluctual snobbery here?

    I take it then the uneducated are not allowed to have an opinion in your view.

  49. And why do you suspect that is Kloot? Think about it

    I have to be careful here Alison in answering your question lest I be jumped on for seeming anti British or lest the retort from some is " well your president aint much better…yada yada yada"

    Ill attempt to answer your question, but believe me, im sincerely coming at this just as an outsider with an interest. Please do not read any anti Britishness into this.

    The reasons why, I believe, the Queen does not make any public political statements is, because she would be vilified by the political class for interfering, and if the statements were unpopular enough, by the tabloids and broadsheets.

    However, and Pete will im no doubt correct me on this, part of the monarchs role is defending the people and providing a counter balance to parliament. A parliament that wants to take away your basic rights is no different then a monarch doing likewise.

  50. Are you saying that maggie is childish, comical ane now lacks education?

    I give up Typhoo. Im wasting my time. The comment was childish and comical, but I didnt imply the person was, you just tried to drag the discussion that way.

  51. you just tried to drag the discussion that way.

    Nope wasn’t me mentioned education, childish comments or comical comments. Those were yours.

    If you want to give up the ghost fine – no problem from me.

  52. D4 –

    Pete – Why do you believe that she’s the most disastrous monarch in your history?

    This is the case for a few reasons. I’ll keep it brief as I’ve been around this mulberry bush a few times on here and ATW has a cracking book coming out soon where you can read all about it.

    At the time of the Queen’s coronation in 1953, Britain was a sovereign nation. 19 years later (1972) she effectively deposed herself with the signing of the European Communities Act. This stated clearly that European law is superior to the Crown. Well she had no right to do that. Her sovereignty is that of the British people, vested in her when she was crowned, there to remain until her death.

    Some people have a difficulty with this concept so I’ll repeat it again simply: the Crown has no sovereignty in and of itself. Sovereignty is that of the British people. No-one has the right – legally or morally – to hand it away.

    Now, 55 years after her coronation, we are on the very brink of becoming a province of a foreign power entirely. At least when Harold lost the Kingdom to William the Bastard, Duke of Normandy he put up a damned good fight. Queen Elizabeth the Betrayor has given away our birthright, the right to govern ourselves as we see fit. She had no right to do so, trampled on the Constitution, spat on her solemn oath to the British people and is guilty of High Treason.

    During the Coronation Oath she swore to govern (for she is the political governor of the nation) the Crown’s Subjects "in accordance with their laws and traditions". For the sake of brevity here I won;t go on, sufice to say Britain in 2008 is a remarkably different place to what it was in 1953. She has allowed her ministers to adopt dictatorial powers whilst stripping her people of their ancient freedoms and liberties. Again, she stands guilty.

    And besides – I thought her role was mostly ceremonial.

    Not at all. This is one of the great lies of the age, long spread by republicans whose aim is to convince the British people that the end of the monarchy would be largely irrelevent.

    On the contrary, the monarchy is the very heart of the British Constitution and parliament merely one estate of the realm.

    Sovereignty, the very power to make law, resides in the monarch until death (or given away illegally.) The monarch is the physical embodiment of the British people and the representation of our sovereignty.Look at the front page of any Act of Parliament. You will see the phrase:

    Be it therefore enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty …

    Here is an explicit recognition that only the Crown may make law and that the sovereign is the political governor of the nation. An Act is only a recommendation until the sovereign consents to it. Minister have no power themselves, only what is devolved to them by the Crown in Parliament. These powers themselves are those vested in the monarch by the British people when the monarch is crowned.

    Only the sovereign may recall and dissolve parliament.If parliament had any sovereign powers itself, that sovereignty would die when parliament is disolved, but it doesn’t because, as I said, it is only one estate of the realm.

    Soldiers, sailors, airman, police officers and all the other officers of the state are loyal to the Crown, not to parliament, for they are loyal to the British people, who she embodies.

    Can the Queen dissent from her ministers recommendations? Of course she can. Each of her predecessors did so. Even as late as her father’s time, it wasn’t uncommon at all for the monarch to send his ministers away with a resounding ‘no’. Clement Atlee was even told by the Queen’s father, the great George VI, who to appoint as Foreign Secretary becasue the first choice was a duffer.

    They all did this because the sworn duty of the monarch is to uphold the freedoms and rights of all Subjects, to govern us ‘in accordance with our laws and traditions’.

    That the Queen must act on her ministers’ recommendations is a fiction. Those ministers must act constitutionally and with the best interests of the British people to the fore. Not only is it her duty, but she is sworn to check her ministers when they do not do so.

    Parliament is really quite incidental to Britain because there are no end of ways for us to govern ourselves. Since Saxon times we have had many kinds of assemblies to discuss affairs and make law, but the monarchy is central and vital to the Constitution.

  53. Kloot. I think it cuts both ways. The anti-Queen attitude in the post is vaguely pathetic, certaibnly childish and comical. Not comical – predictable. So honestly I can’t see the issue with the response in kind from Maggie – certainly not that it would cause such a shit storm. This is the the thing about all issues Irish which is sad really. What’s up with that? I mean honestly why does every single issue about Ireland result in such acrimony – whatever it is about. Do you think Ireland will ever move on from the bitterness that shapes it? You won’t get any attitude from me Kloot ( i like you and your comments on ATW ) because I rarely delve into these threads for the reason i’ve just stated. Too damn scary! But honest to God I find it baffling if not truly sad that one response in kind results in a thread like this.

    As for the Queen Pete should know that if he wants the Queen off the throne he could actually do that as a British subject. But since noone in this country has ever raised any vocal objections to her handling of state matters the idea that she is at fault is ridiculous.

  54. Typhool,

    None of your comments make any sense.You commented negatively on the Irish President because of percieved ‘slagging off’ of your Queen when a quick glance back shows that nobody disrespected her.

    Kloot – If I were you i’d give up trying – he obviously hasn’t got enough cop on to understand.

  55. "’slagging off’ of your Queen "

    She’s my Queen because the free staters sold us out lol. to add insult to injury you gave up articles 2 and 3.

    Take it down from the mast…….lol

    You weren’t on a drunken bicycle at the weekend by any chance were you??

  56. And i should add that it is senseless dwelling on the past and or what her father did – in the last 50 years she has paid the price for a modern monarchy via compromise. It really is that simple. And no – that’s not her fault either.

  57. Alison –

    Of course I know that it is our right to depose the monarch when they are unfit. You only know that because I told you so.

  58. You cheeky sod. So why haven’t you removed her then? Please go ahead. It would make the news interesting and we could hear something other than the bloody boring US election stuff.

  59. For crying out loud.

    Alison –

    What on earth are you going on about?:

    she has paid the price for a modern monarchy via compromise

    She is the Head of a constitutional monarchy governed by law. ‘Compromising’ with anyone or anything doesn’t come into it. The solemn oath she swore is clear and plain. Her duties are clear and plain. Her betrayal of the British people is clear and plain.

  60. The anti-Queen attitude in the post is vaguely pathetic, certaibnly childish and comical

    Alison,

    This is where I despair. The ROI is not some big anti British state. Its far far far from that. British companies are littered across the ROI as are Irish companies across the UK. British and Irish people are on the friendliest of terms in generations and long may it continue. Travel between these two states has never been as frequent and the ties both cultural, political and financial continue to increase. As I said earlier, the Monarchy sells a bucket load of magazine copy in the ROI. There were massive queues outside the British embassy when Diane died.

    As for this thread, the weird thing is, that not a single negative comment about the Queen has been offered up by any of the Irish commentators. None! seriously. All welcomed the idea and had no problem with it.

    The whole Typhoo v Me debate was over me taking offence at the only negative comment offered up, which demonstrated something not often enough talked about, ie the anti Irishness that resides in the attitude of some people in the UK. I say some, because I know that this is not the case with the absolute majority. Now the comment is not enough to write Maggie off as some raving anti irish person, far from it. It is but one line and only dragged out as far as it did because of typhoo taking some strange leaps in terms of conclusions from it.

  61. "She’s my Queen because the free staters sold us out lol. to add insult to injury you gave up articles 2 and 3."

    Don’t start the ‘take it down form the mast’ crap. You bloody people – the prods oppressed us, the ‘free state abandoned us blahdy blahdy blah…..

    Polls have consistently shown HUGE amounts of northern catholics as being for the Union.

    And – the more that time goes on the more i’m starting to see it as a good thing.

    The six counties costs the Brits almost 10 BILLION euro PER YEAR to subsidise and all they ever seem to get is grief.

    The place has recieved huge sums from London every year since the 1940’s.

    The Republic is well off without the hassle and without whingers like you about the place !!!

  62. Kloot,

    I find it strange that people like you will say things along the line of, the northern question is settled and there is peace. How many times must the issue of reconcilliation be made??? There are invisible walls, and quite frankly your response to maggie is one of those invisible walls.

    We will criticise you. The monarchy, British politicians, the north, all of it, but one person – in this case its maggie – offers up something negative about the republic or Irish people in general and the brown stuff hits the fan.

    "ie the anti Irishness that resides in the attitude of some people in the UK"

    The reverse isn’t true in the republic by any chance???

  63. Oh Pete seriously – wise up to whats going on please. What on earth are YOU on about? Since when has the British public shown any interest whatsoever in their constitutional rights? Or for that matter what she may or may not be betraying? It’s the people who are to blame Pete not the Monarch. She does what she assumes is what we all want rather than what she should because its 2007 and monarchies are hard to enforce these days

  64. ‘Her betrayal of the British people is clear and plain’.

    Crap! And so much so that noone gives a shit. Take a look around. Ask anyone. And if you get a response that indicates that’s true from your average punter on the street then fair enough. Ask them 70 years ago and it would have been a different matter.

  65. The Monster Raving Looney Party get more votes in the UK than Republican Sinn Féin get in the Republic.

    Why lead your piece with the views of nobodies? Has anyone ever heard of this Des chap before?

    RSF have a grand total of zero elected officials, without a single councillor in the country.

    But if you feel the need to give them the oxygen of publicity, that’s your own affair.

  66. D4 any chance of a link to those polls that says catholics in huge numbers are for the union. I only ask since SF are the biggest nationalist party and they aren’t peddaling the union.

    Look forward to your links….

  67. You made the assertion either back up what you say or concede the argument.

    While we’re at it, any chance of an explanation as to why FF would want to come north if nationalists are hugely in favour of the union.

    lol

  68. ‘the Monarchy sells a bucket load of magazine copy in the ROI’

    And in France the Queen came top of the list for Frances’ Favourite People too recently 😉

    I’m not sure there is anti Irish sentiment in the UK Kloot. Only anti IRA sentiment. But honestly being British means being hated. So we get in the neck all the time. I would say i was used to it but it gets on my nerves. So i understand where you are coming from with perceptions of negativity or anti-ness, honest.

  69. "this case its maggie – offers up something negative about the republic or Irish people in general and the brown stuff hits the fan".

    I do think Typhoo has a point there though fellas

  70. I didn’t say nationalists were hugely in favour of the union. Either your thick or you are again trying to twist things. I said that surveys had shown huge numbers of catholics in NI favouring the union.

    The have consistently shown up to 20% of the Catholic population of NI support the maintenance of the status quo. The NI RC population currently stands at circa 445 percent of the population – you do you maths – it adds up to huge amounts of people.

    Now less of the ‘take it down from the mast’ whinging and please don’t use the term ‘Free State’ to describe what has been the Republic of Ireland since 1949.

    Get with the programme !!

  71. It amuses me greatly to read this protracted BS about a female mammal whose only claim to fame is being born to a royal pair.

    I’ve nothing against Brenda—I’m sure she has her good points—but it hasn’t escaped my notice that she’s as much a freak of nurture as Michael Jackson.

    He grew up in a dysfunctional and public family; so did she. He was never allowed to have a normal childhood; nor was she. He was a world celebrity before he had a chance to catch his breath; so was she. He lives in a mansion shut off from the common people; so does she. His press agents carefully dispense what his public "needs" to know; so do hers. Few people actually know him; same holds for Brenda. He longed to be white, dyed his skin and changed his features; so did she.

    OK, I made that last one up :0) At the same time, he can sing and dance brilliantly. She can’t. I don’t honestly know what she can do that’s anything special. No doubt the forelock tuggers will enlighten me.

  72. This thread has taken a turn for the bizarre since I went off to lunch!

    Typhoo,

    Maggie’s comment was silly and has no more merit than "my Daddy’s better than your Daddy." Kloot had a right to dismiss it. This wasn’t "anti-Britishness".

    In fact, I haven’t spotted any anti-Britishness from the Irish commentators on this thread at all; perhaps there is suspicion of the idea of monarchy but many Britons have that as well.

    D4,

    Your northern nationalists remark was pretty poor form. Sounds like you’ve been reading the Sunday Wankependent too much recently!

  73. "I said that surveys had shown huge numbers of catholics in NI favouring the union."

    "Life and Times survey Typhool"

    Back up what you say or retract it. Either there is a poll like you say or there isn’t.

    Get back to me when you provide the evidence.

  74. Alison –

    Even if you’re right (you’re not) so what? The law is the law, the constitution is the constitution and the Queen is sworn to defend it. Neither exist to be upheld only if we’re looking or taking an interest.

    It’s long been clear you have little knowledge of the constitution. Why you’re backing the most disastrous monarch in our history is plain – she’s a woman. If we had a King instead, I doubt you’d have two words to say on the matter.

  75. Yes that’s it it Pete. Totally. You’re completely right. Obviously that’s all you want to hear. Why? Because you’re a bloke

  76. Typhool,

    Follow the link to the 2000 life and times survey – showing a whopping 48% of Northrn Catholics favouring union with the Republic.

    16% wanted to remain British if you take the RC population to be 900,000 for example- that ads up to 144,000 people – almost enough to fill Croke Park twice over – a HUGE amount of people who are RC, live in NI and want to be British.

    Now – will this make you apologize for the ‘free state’ take it down from the mast MOPEry.

    I won’t hold my breath.

    http://www.ark.ac.uk/publications/updates/update3.PDF

  77. >>Can the Queen dissent from her ministers recommendations? Of course she can. Each of her predecessors did so. Even as late as her father’s time,<<

    Pete, you may find comfort in technicalities but the British monarch started doing what Parliament said he/she should do almost 400 years ago.

    >>"this case its maggie – offers up something negative about the republic or Irish people in general and the brown stuff hits the fan".

    I do think Typhoo has a point there though fellas<<

    LOL, so Alison says that Maggie is right about the Irish reaction (i.e. that the Queen is better than the bombers of Omagh and some looney dissident republicans who represent less than 0.01% of Irish people – surely a major understatement in itself). Typhoo then chimes in that Alison is making a good point. Then Typhoo says that maggie was criticising the Irish people IN GENERAL, and Alison obediently says Typhoo is making a good point!

    Get you act together, girls. What did maggie mean by "The queen is better than the lot of them"
    (I personally think she meant better than all previous monarchs!)

  78. 16% vs 48% of RC are in favor of Irish unity.

    In a democracy majority rules! You are entitled to argue whether its a big or small amount of people, someone who is interestede may take you up.

  79. >>showing a whopping 48% of Northrn Catholics favouring union with the Republic.<<

    Common sense should tell you that that figure is nonsense, D4.

    Remember that over 90% of Northern Catholics consistently vote for parties whose stated aim is to do just that.

  80. so Alison says that Maggie is right about the Irish reaction (i.e. that the Queen is better than the bombers of Omagh and some looney dissident republicans who represent less than 0.01% of Irish people – surely a major understatement in itself).

    Honestly Noel – what does that even mean?

  81. Yes D4 – Democracy rules – and your part of the UK thankfully !

    Now off with you and your whinging – go and spend some coins with your Queens head or buy yourself a stamp with your Queens head on it and go and post it in a Red box with ER written on it!!

    Now please don’t slag off the Head of state of you neighbour again, Its RUDE !!

  82. >>Noel wades in to shit stir as usual without a relevant point<<

    All the relevant points on this thread have long since been made, Alison.

    All that remains is to stir the tribal shit that you and Typhoo deposited on it.

  83. Yes D4 – Democracy rules – and your part of the UK thankfully !

    "Now off with you and your whinging – go and spend some coins with your Queens head or buy yourself a stamp with your Queens head on it and go and post it in a Red box with ER written on it!!

    Now please don’t slag off the Head of state of you neighbour again, Its RUDE !!"

    This guy is DEFINITELY drunken cyclist!!! LOL

  84. Noel – Follow the link and read the survey – circa 144000 northern Catholics favouring the union.
    The Life and Times survey is always consistant.

  85. Typhoo,

    You are the one who said that our President had nothing to boast about – you then went on to claim that they are paid £1000, you questioned the office of President – and you later said ‘take it down from the mast’ – A line from a song about my country’s flag which used to be sang by IRA types if i’m right??

    LOL

  86. >>Honestly Noel – what does that even mean?<<

    (This is my last post on this thread, I promise)

    I think you didn’t read the thread, Alison. The objections to the Queen’s visit were voiced in the post by VP of RFF, the party behind the Omagh bombers, and a few looney dissidents, whose support taken together would probably fit easily into a single jail cell. There is among Irish people NO objection to the Queen’s visit of the slightest significance.

    You then said that maggie was referring with her now famous comment ("(The Queen) is far too good for the lot of them.") at 11:26 to this objection, i.e. that the Queen is too good for the Omagh bombers’ party and other dissidents.
    I think you, and Typhoo, simply saw Irish people discussing the Queen’s proposed visit and automatically assumed we were against it and/or criticising her. Well, we weren’t.

    (Although frankly the whole thing does lend itself rather well to several jokes; nothing to get excited about, though)

  87. Her infamous comment you mean? Truly infamous single remark that caused such an uproar?

    No i think i get it Noel.

  88. You then said that maggie was referring with her now famous comment ("(The Queen) is far too good for the lot of them.") at 11:26 to this objection, i.e. that the Queen is too good for the Omagh bombers’ party and other dissidents.

    Noel, If that was the intention of Maggies comment, ie that the Queen was too good for "the Omagh bombers’ party and other dissidents." then I unreservedly apologise to her, I assumed she was referring to the Irish as a whole.

    I’m not sure there is anti Irish sentiment in the UK Kloot. Only anti IRA sentiment. But honestly being British means being hated. So we get in the neck all the time. I would say i was used to it but it gets on my nerves. So i understand where you are coming from with perceptions of negativity or anti-ness, honest.

    I can understand why it would get on your nerves.
    Anti British sentiment does of course exist in the ROI. David himself has provided links above to some examples. Its not at all however on the scale that some people like to portray at times.

    The same I believe can be said regarding anti Irishness in the UK. Its there, but minimal. A recent Irish post on Guy Fawkes blog descended into an example of an expression of it.

  89. Queen coming to Ireland? I fully support it, though without Freddie Mercury it won’t be the same.

    Seriously though, the Head of State of a neighboring nation that one is at peace with and with whom one enjoys many present positive interactions should be more than welcome.

  90. Cheers Kloot,

    I don’t know why but I find reading anti – Irish stuff facinating.

    I occasionally even take a peak at the forum on Caltonradio.com !!

    I’m sometimes amazed, flabbergasted and genuinely amused !!

  91. "I occasionally even take a peak at the forum on Caltonradio.com !!"

    I’ve never looked at it but I hear it’s hilarious.

  92. Here you go D4

    Guido Fawkes

    A lot of it is just condescending remarks, some of it is outright anti Irish. As ive said already though, I do not believe you average George on the street to be anti Irish, the reality is probably quiet the opposite.

    Caltonradio just depresses the crap out of me. I look at it sometimes for… well I duno why. Its morbidly fascinating. The things that are thrown out are just beyond belief sometimes. You feel like contributing to try dispel some of the myths, but then you know from the experience of others that you will be blacklisted within minutes for countering their views in anyway at all.

  93. I’ve never looked at it but I hear it’s hilarious

    Give it a go and see what you think. Try spend more then 30 mins on it and still not have shouted at the screen once!! I dare ya 🙂

  94. "Now off with you and your whinging – go and spend some coins with your Queens head or buy yourself a stamp with your Queens head on it and go and post it in a Red box with ER written on it!!"

    LOL tell that to mary robinson your president, she is from ardoyne in north belfast.

    lol

  95. Reg

    Give Calton a go – I personally find it funnier than a Ross O’Carroll Kelly book and Catherine tate combined!

    It did take me a while to figure out what some of terminology meant – such as Roman, Idolator etc !!!

    Give it a go.

  96. Typhoo,

    Firstly – Mary Robinson has not been President since 1997.

    Secondly – Our current President, Mary McAleese lives in Aras an Uachtarain, which is not based in North Belfast but the Phoenix Park in Dublin City.

  97. "LOL tell that to mary robinson your president, she is from ardoyne in north belfast."

    Er…Typhoo! Read that one back to yourself!

  98. "Secondly – Our current President, Mary McAleese lives in Aras an Uachtarain, which is not based in North Belfast but the Phoenix Park in Dublin City."

    Thats right, her husband Martin is the guy who plays golf with the UDA’s McDonald? Isn’t that right?

    tut tut, martin buys the rounds of booze with your hard earned tax euro.

  99. Noel: "I really think you should wait until Troll starts posting his pieces before commenting."

    ROFL

  100. "All that remains is to stir the tribal shit that you and Typhoo deposited on it".

    God what a load of old bollocks. And in one sentence Noel succinctly explains why anything Ireland related is off limits in as much as if someone sees something differently they can’t be right, it has to mean its full on tribal. Like i said Noel, i think i get it.

  101. I\m sorry I didn’t realise you were waiting for another comment…then here goes ‘shes far too good for the lot you’. This should keep this mindless thread going for a while

  102. >>shes far too good for the lot you<<

    Maggie, is that her English where you come from?

  103. Totally agree NC extremely bad English but it was a typing mistake actually – thought you might have guessed that but ah well.

  104. Maggie, I really like what you wrote over on the Limb Donor Card thread, so you’re not all bad!

  105. The British Queen isn’t fit to polish the boots of a single proud Irish citizen.

    There, that should, give this thread, oh another 6 pages at least 🙂

  106. If HM does go to Dublin I hope she gets a better reception than I did the second last time I as there!!! ;o)

  107. >>If HM does go to Dublin I hope she gets a better reception than I did the second last time I as there!<<

    Well, I don’t suppose she’ll have any terrorist apologists in her entourage! 🙂

  108. But Aileen, is it true that you were caught on camera grabbing a scaffolding pole and shouting "Come on you fenian bastards, I’ll take the lot of you on, you shamrock munching guinness soaked potato faced leprechauns ( while provocatively waving your Orange cardie in the air) 🙂

  109. Colm

    Heat of the moment stuff! You know how it is!

    Has "the cardie" become an Orange one now?

    and just which sence of "provocatively" did you mean?

  110. Colm

    Is that who it was? I saw it on RTE, It was Aileen? And I thought she was such a sweet girl!!!!

  111. Aileen,

    Did you know that the REAL queen – Rita Floorcloth – in coronation st dies on friday night?

    You’ll need the cardie for the funeral.

  112. I was wondering as I knew Vera was on her way out. To lose Rita too would be too much to handle. Corrie has some similarities with the Queen, but Corrie got to the Republic long before her. :o)

  113. Does anybody actually know this queen? I ask only because most here seem to have a pretty good take on her.

    I haven’t actually met her, although I was once in the same room and could observe her. I did meet a couple of the Windsor clan and can assure all here that it was like speaking with alien beings. These are not normal people. I don’t blame them for it; had you been raised as a hothouse plant, you’d be prickly and sickly too.

    Alison thought I was being cynical when I compared Brenda’s situation with that of Jacko. I assure you I was deadly serious. Anyone like to take issue with the points I raised, do feel free.

    As a republican I regard any royal family as being quite OTT. The Windsors seem to me to be more OTT than others, but perhaps that’s because I’m closer to them.

    From what I gather from Brenda, in other circumstances she’d have been just about capable of managing a works canteen. If anyone has evidence to the contrary I’d sure like to hear it.

  114. Colm,

    Among other things yes. In the room she came across as a cyborg, no discernible human feelings at all. The whole scene was bizarre: grown men and women bowing and scraping for this rather unprepossessing grandmother.

    I doubt I shall ever understand royalism. I suppose it’s like religion: one needs to be spoonfed it from birth for it to make any sense at all. It leaves me baffled and wondering about the sanity of my fellow creatures.

  115. Dawkins

    On a personal level that behaviour you observed by the Queen is probably exactly intended as the most appropriate way in which she can do her job with the minimal controversy. Whatever you might think of the whole business, she has managed to do it exceptionally well.

Comments are closed.