The Queen NAZI Salute Film released

a reply to: Montana

Beings as there is no audio with the video, I'm saying the Royals were saluting the US flag, not Hitler.

And if there had been audio we'd have heard them singing the Star Spangled Banner ?

a reply to: gortex

And if there had been audio we'd have heard them singing the Star Spangled Banner ?

Now that would be one hell of a conspiracy there.

originally posted by: woogleuk
a reply to: crazyewok

The Sun is a trash newspaper, the only good thing about it was page 3, and that's no longer there....well, page 3 is, just not the content millions of young gentleman (and ladies of the more macho sense) want to see.

I would like to point out the irony in that comment, and then go on to explain how it was actually 'page 3' that helped make it a trash newspaper!!!!!

But i miss page 3 too

If it helps, the agony aunt section of the Sunday Sport is an adequate alternative... Allegedly

Kind Regards,

A. Gentleman

P.S.. Not all lesbians are macho, i watched a 'Gentlemans educational movie' once!



lol

originally posted by: HumanPLC

originally posted by: MontanaI'm saying the Royals were saluting the US flag, not Hitler.

What's the big deal? You got a problem with saluting the US flag?

Yep, that could well have been the case, but when you also consider the facts that:

The royals have a German bloodline
Eddie was a known nazi sympathiser
and 1933 was probably the biggest year in nazi history

Then i would say its fair to lean towards it being a nazi salute.

Surely 1938 or '39 was the biggest year in nazi history?

a reply to: uncommitted

lol, alright then, fair point but i would say its arguable.

1933 is when they came into power, if they hadn't have gained power then 1938/9 would not have been possible. In fact you could even argue that 1938/9 was the start of their downfall.

i def see where you are coming from though.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Monger

Edward was forced behind the scenes to abdicate in 1936, and Nazism wasn't behaving as ISIS publicly in 1933.

Well they just were, you do know that they beheaded lovers of Polish spys, you do know that in 1933 the Nazi regime were still considered as hostiles by at least America and Britain.
For a king and his consort to 'mess about' in that fashion even then would have been considered a disgrace..had it been known. The children likely knew little.

Doing a bit of reading up on Eddie from the video and just came across this quote from Hitler about him.

I am certain through him permanent friendly relations could have been achieved. If he had stayed, everything would have been different. His abdication was a severe loss for us.

Earlier i implied that it could have been all the Royals and not just those in the video, but that quote seems to contradict that.

Still i thought i would include, im not a royal fan but fairs fair, Quensbury rules n all that.

a reply to: smurfy

Most of the world were clueless about many things the Nazis were doing until 1945.

Edwards VIII was a known Nazi sympathiser as I already posted, but the Queen then was about 7 and not likely to know, she also drove a van and did her bit during the war. As I also said Churchill and the Archbishop of Canterbury were furious at Edward VIII and he was forced to abdicate.

The public perception of Nazis in 1933 was not the same as it was during and after the war, many upper class championed it as a force against socialism from Communist Russia and all the average people heard about anything was limited, from newspapers or the radio, there wasn't tv or internet then and the Nazi propaganda machine was in full swing, even most of Germany were oblivious to the realities.

www.bbc.co.uk...

An evaluation of the reasons for the British policy of appeasement, 1936-1938

Economic difficulties
Europe's economy was still recovering from WWI and the effects of the Wall Street Crash. It was thought that a strong, prosperous Germany could help revitalise the economy of these nations.

During the 1930s there was a great trade depression and money was tight. With three million people unemployed, the government had to spend money on social welfare rather than weapons and soldiers. Chamberlain wanted to increase the amount of money used for social welfare, so was reluctant to increase military spending.

Attitudes to the Paris peace settlement
Feelings expressed by Lord Lothian during the Rhineland crisis that Germany was "only going into their own back garden" had support.

Popular opinion in Britain at the time was that German had been punished too heavily by the terms of the Versailles treaty. Paying reparations to the nations it had invaded had crippled the German economy.

Before the outbreak of war, many people in Britain admired Hitler. After the ruinous end of WWI, Hitler appeared to have rebuilt Germany and made it a powerful country again.

Many people thought Hitler's demands to regain control of territories that used to belong to Germany were justified as many of these territories had German-speaking populations.

Public opinion
After the Rhineland crisis in a debate in the House of Commons in March 1936, Sir Winston Churchill warned that the atmosphere in Europe had changed recently to the extent that war was being regarded as a serious responsibility. He also described the German occupation of the Rhineland as a menace to Holland, Belgium and France.

After Guernica in April 1937 support for non-intervention increased as it was feared that "the bomber will always get through". Of the British public only a minority favoured a stronger line, and then only when British interests/lives were threatened. Commentators such a Low were very critical of non intervention however this was a minority view.

Closer links between Germany and Austria were seen as inevitable. Some politicians held the view that Austria generally welcomed the Anschluss and that it would be futile to try and preserve their independence against their own wishes. There was a lack of public concern as Austria was German speaking, and had subsequently supported the Anschluss in a plebiscite. The Anschluss was not seen as a problem by most people because the Anschluss was seen as a product of the Versailles Settlement which was already widely discredited. Minority opinions showed serious concern – part of the wider scheme of expansion and aggression by Hitler, this was the view of some Conservatives such as Churchill and other anti-appeaser's such as Low. Churchill called the Anschluss "a programme of aggression, nicely calculated and timed". Minority of public concerned over immediate persecution of Austrian Jews reported in the press.

Fear over spread of Communism
Many British politicians regarded Communism as a greater threat than Nazi Germany. Their view of brutal Communism was reinforced by the brutal show trials if the 1930s in Stalin's Soviet Union. A common saying at the time was "better Hitlerism than Communism".

In Britain during most of the 1930s, the Conservative party was in power. They believed that Communism was a far greater threat to world peace than Hitler.

The Conservatives believed that Hitler's Germany could be a strong defence against possible Soviet plans to invade Europe

Beliefs of Chamberlain
Chamberlain believed that Hitler was making extreme statements only to gain publicity and that he was essentially a reasonable man who would choose negotiation rather than conflict.

Several prominent British politicians were very impressed by Hitler. The former PM Lloyd George, who met Hitler in 1936 returned to Britain to describe him as a man of supreme quality. The Labour MP and former party leader George Lansbury, who was a pacifist, wrote in 1937 that Hitler would not go to war unless other people pushed him into it.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
Nothing to see here..move along.

Yea, WTF was THAT all about?
It seemed to be quietly swept under the rug.
Great catch.
*4u.

Shocked how many people don't realize the Royals' German connections.

The house of Windsor springs from the marriage of Queen Victoria to Prince Albert in 1840. He was the son of the Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha in Germany and his name became that used by the British royal family.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Absolutely agree; however, its not the public perception that matters in relation to this, its the perception of the participants in the video, the Royals, who happen to be one of the most powerful families in the world.

she also drove a van and did her bit during the war.

C'mon, she was heir to the throne... That bit of propaganda, and it is propaganda, conjures up images of her driving a van through the streets of London during the blitz with bombs falling around her left right and centre.

Can you really see the heir to the throne being allowed to do that?

I can assure you, what she did was for PR purposes and was therfore the absolute minimum required.

She joined the Auxiliary Territorial Service (ATS) as a subaltern. She learnt with all the other girls on the course, to change wheels, take engines apart and rebuild them, and to drive heavy vehicles such as ambulances. However, it was felt necessary to make some concessions to the safety of the heir to the throne and she went back to the castle to sleep each night.

Source:
royalcentral.co.uk...


Bit like Harry in Afghanistan...

a reply to: HumanPLC

Thank you! A picture exists of her changing a tire during the war, great effort old girl! I know a little old lady who traveled from Canada to Belgium and worked as a nurse in conditions that are unimaginable.

Celebrating the absolute, barest minimum effort put in by the royals during WWII diminishes the sacrifices of the millions of little people, as far as I'm concerned.

a reply to: HumanPLC

Obviously there are those attempting goading into debate about the Royal family in general, Nazism etc, I am not buying it.

The thread is about a 7 year old that was not then heir to the throne doing a Nazi salute and Edward VIII who was a known Nazi sympathiser, it was also 1933, there wasn't any indication of the extent of their atrocities then and it was 6 years before WWII.

If you or anyone else wants to debate the role of the Royals during WWII or Nazism I suggest making a thread about it.

I have better things to do than replying to goading.

The Bastards...They know no shame.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

C'mon mate, be fair... Ive not goaded you, and if it came across that way i apoligise.

All im doing is correcting what i consider to be the incorrect statement you made with regards to the queen being portrayed as a wartime hero. Its actually a popular myth that a lot of people believe; however, sadly, its the result of propoganda... You can see it at work again with Harry and Afghanistan.

Its what they do! How else do you think they get to stay in such a high position of power without any form of democracy.

a reply to: HumanPLC

Goading includes implying things never said.

I said ''did her bit during the war''

you translated that as ''wartime hero''.

She was a princess and only 13 when WWII commenced and 19 when it stopped, at 16 she did as the government asked, now stop suggesting things I never said.

Strawman arguments are contrary to T&C.

royalcentral.co.uk...

When Elizabeth turned 15, she began to take on more social tasks. In 1942, her father made her Colonel of the Grenadier Guards and she carried out their inspections. When she turned 16, she registered with the Labour Exchange like every other girl her age, and she became desperate to join one of the women’s services. The King was reluctant in case she was placed in danger, but eventually he agreed. He could see the sense in her request to do just as other young women were doing. She joined the Auxiliary Territorial Service (ATS) as a subaltern. She learnt with all the other girls on the course, to change wheels, take engines apart and rebuild them, and to drive heavy vehicles such as ambulances. However, it was felt necessary to make some concessions to the safety of the heir to the throne and she went back to the castle to sleep each night. As proud parents, the King and Queen came to see the princess perform a demonstration on the day of her last test and could not help be a little worried about her when she drove through the busy traffic of London up The Mall and through the gates of Buckingham Palace to show them what she could do! One of Elizabeth’s new official roles was to become a Councillor of State. Along with the Queen and other Councillors, she had the authority to act in the King’s absence, such as when he made a secret wartime trip to Italy. When Elizabeth had to sign a reprieve in a murder conviction, she wondered at the horrible things that some people could do. For her, it was another part of growing up.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Now youve gone and got all ATS on me, lol.

Look, if you perceived something as i said as 'translating' or 'implying', im sorry, i didnt ,mean it that way. I dont want to get in a row.

I think your wrong, its as simple as that. No malice intended, its a forum for debate and so im happy to listen to, and take on board any counter arguments you may have.

What the bloody hell is a 'Strawman argument', lol.

Edit to add...

Hey man, ive just been reading your posts (sorry, lol) and youre pretty switched on! You seriously dont go for the whole royal debacle, do you?

For all we know they could have been playing a game of "Simon Says"

Or perhaps the person behind the camera was shouting who wants a slice of a cake and they were raising their hands like schoolchildren?

With no context should we really jump to conclusions that this was really a Nazi salute?

As people have already stated in the 1930s there was serious concern about Russia and the spread of communism. The British monarchy was the only one of the major powers to survive WWI.We should not forget that sympathies lay with the Nazis in many quarters of Europe and in the United States.



The Nazis even promoted their cause in America by getting to the youth. All looks like an innocent scout camp until you notice the Nazi symbolism and raising of the flags about 14 mins in.



So whatever was going on in the films we should try to place it in context with the times.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h


Seems when things can be taken out of context we get what this video is trying to claim.

Except this film hasn't been taken out-of-context. They really are all giving the Nazi salute.

a reply to: gortex

And everyone passing judgment on this is entirely ignorant to European history or the social climate prior to WW2.
It seems the SUN was onto a guaranteed winner with this bs story, they were right in their assumption that the majority of people truly are ignorant to our own history.

She was a teenage girl, living in a time BEFORE WW2 had broken out, a time when Hitler was basically little more than an outspoken and somewhat entertaining character on cinema reels.