Mr Mosquito Posted May 26, 2006 Report Share Posted May 26, 2006 So, we are all Germanic. Glad that's settled.Personally, I maintain that the Dutch people are more similar to me and my way of thinking - toilet humour jokes, drinking, sex and football being their main topics of conversation just like what you find on the subcider forum. The Germans are far too serious for my liking and they remind me of the archetypal corrupt Royalist Gestapo Policeman of this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Orj Posted May 26, 2006 Report Share Posted May 26, 2006 Personally, I maintain that the Dutch people are more similar to me and my way of thinking - toilet humour jokes, drinking, sex and football being their main topics of conversation just like what you find on the subcider forum. The Germans are far too serious for my liking and they remind me of the archetypal corrupt Royalist Gestapo Policeman of this country.Fair enough, I'll concede to you on the humour thing. However, I have to take issue with the drinking, the sex and the football.German beers are some of the best in the world and their beer festivals set the standard. They might not play football the way it ought to be played but it is still a national obsession and they have rather a better international record than the English; mind you, I can't really get my head around their bizarre attempted theft of our Euro '96 song. And, as for the sex... I once heard a rumour that they made lots of specialist films in Germany starring dungaree clad men carrying adjustable spanners, set to the soundtrack of a wakka wakka guitars. Not that I've ever seen one myself, of course.Anyway, I'm getting of track here. It was your very own quote that from Bede that referred to us as "Germanic settlers" and since he is the only source we have for that era of our history, we have to accept that his version of events is as close to the truth as we will ever get. So that's settled, then - we are all, HRH included, Germanic.Another thing... since when did the Dutch have a sense of humour? I've encountered many Dutch people over the years and their collective wit and sense of subtlety make Lenny Henry seem positively hilarious.I guess the point I am trying to make is that this is all very subjective and arbitrary anyway - it depends how far back you want to go. The English are German descended, HRH is German descended but if you go back far enough we are all Ethiopian. Perhaps the true legitimate Monarch is neither in Windsor nor Ashton Gate nor Schleswig-Holstein but is selling fruit on a market stall somewhere in Addis Ababa? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted May 27, 2006 Report Share Posted May 27, 2006 Fair enough, I'll concede to you on the humour thing. However, I have to take issue with the drinking, the sex and the football.German beers are some of the best in the world and their beer festivals set the standard. They might not play football the way it ought to be played but it is still a national obsession and they have rather a better international record than the English; mind you, I can't really get my head around their bizarre attempted theft of our Euro '96 song. And, as for the sex... I once heard a rumour that they made lots of specialist films in Germany starring dungaree clad men carrying adjustable spanners, set to the soundtrack of a wakka wakka guitars. Not that I've ever seen one myself, of course.Anyway, I'm getting of track here. It was your very own quote that from Bede that referred to us as "Germanic settlers" and since he is the only source we have for that era of our history, we have to accept that his version of events is as close to the truth as we will ever get. So that's settled, then - we are all, HRH included, Germanic.Another thing... since when did the Dutch have a sense of humour? I've encountered many Dutch people over the years and their collective wit and sense of subtlety make Lenny Henry seem positively hilarious.I guess the point I am trying to make is that this is all very subjective and arbitrary anyway - it depends how far back you want to go. The English are German descended, HRH is German descended but if you go back far enough we are all Ethiopian. Perhaps the true legitimate Monarch is neither in Windsor nor Ashton Gate nor Schleswig-Holstein but is selling fruit on a market stall somewhere in Addis Ababa?OK, I'll concede that the Germans are a great people with regard to beer swilling and they have a better world cup record than us. Your Queen Elizabeth is still the wrong type of German to be a legitimate heir to the English throne and this point has been proved academically by Baldrick (Tony Robinson) himself. Go back far enough and you'll find that our Angle ancestors - from present day laid back Scandanavian Denmark as you rightly stated - worshipped the cow as a deity much as present day Hindus do. There's speculation that the Angles may have originated in India as they had a Eurasian religion. The fact that the English people are partly descended from the Angles makes us a very different people to the Germans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irishred Posted May 27, 2006 Report Share Posted May 27, 2006 Sorry lads but you must all bow to the Celts - the original and the best. If you want beer swilling to be a mark of civilisation you cannot pass your celtic cousins! :Party3: :Party12: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted May 27, 2006 Report Share Posted May 27, 2006 Sorry lads but you must all bow to the Celts - the original and the best. If you want beer swilling to be a mark of civilisation you cannot pass your celtic cousins! :Party3: :Party12: Irishred, you've dropped yourself right in it. Look at the map of continental Europe at 400 BC - huge swathes of Europe were Celtic including central Germany from where Orj's imposter Queen Elizabeth originates. Note that my English ancestors i.e. the Angles, Jutes and Saxons are from the North of the Celtic region. Therefore Queen Elizabeth is more a Queen of the Celts than the English You Celts will pay more tax accordingly - the Royalist Blair regime will make sure of that. The green area suggests a possible extent of (proto-)Celtic influence around 1000 BC. The orange area shows the region of birth of the La Tène style. The red area indicates an idea of the possible region of Celtic influence around 400 BC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinC Posted May 27, 2006 Report Share Posted May 27, 2006 I'm not sure I follow your argument about the present queen being an "imposter", in that pre Richard lll there were occasions when rival claims were made for the English throne. Were any of those who succeeded to the throne "imposters" too?Hey Goblin, still waiting................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted May 27, 2006 Report Share Posted May 27, 2006 Hey Goblin, still waiting...................You'll need to watch Tony Robinson's CH4 programme on this subject originally broadcast circa January 2004 for the full story from the academic perspective. I'm not an historian but every English Monarch after King Richard III was/is deemed an imposter - even William Shakespeare made several guarded comments on Queen Elizabeth I being an imposter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinC Posted May 28, 2006 Report Share Posted May 28, 2006 You'll need to watch Tony Robinson's CH4 programme on this subject originally broadcast circa January 2004 for the full story from the academic perspective. I'm not an historian but every English Monarch after King Richard III was/is deemed an imposter - even William Shakespeare made several guarded comments on Queen Elizabeth I being an imposter. I saw the programme, it features an Australian who is the direct descendant of Richard lll. As I said, there were conflicting claimants to the English throne long before the time of the Tudors, and any one of these could have legitimate claims to the throne. Baldrick's pal is just one "claimant" out of many. As it is the present monarch is head of state "according to law", therefore is the present - LEGAL - monarch, regardless of the opinions of others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted May 28, 2006 Report Share Posted May 28, 2006 I saw the programme, it features an Australian who is the direct descendant of Richard lll. As I said, there were conflicting claimants to the English throne long before the time of the Tudors, and any one of these could have legitimate claims to the throne. Baldrick's pal is just one "claimant" out of many. As it is the present monarch is head of state "according to law", therefore is the present - LEGAL - monarch, regardless of the opinions of others.When the idiots that govern this country complain that certain other countries are pariah states for not 'embracing democracy' I cringe. This country has an unelected head of state there by birthright with an unelected second chamber of Parliament - the toff/snob House of Lords - also there by birthright. It's about time this country practised what it preaches by becoming a true democracy by abolishing the office of King/Queen. The House of Lords must also be democratised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinC Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 When the idiots that govern this country complain that certain other countries are pariah states for not 'embracing democracy' I cringe. This country has an unelected head of state there by birthright with an unelected second chamber of Parliament - the toff/snob House of Lords - also there by birthright. It's about time this country practised what it preaches by becoming a true democracy by abolishing the office of King/Queen. The House of Lords must also be democratised.I agree that the House of Lords needs to be reformed or abolished, it seems strange that unelected governors can affect legislation, whereas the Queen is a ceremonial Head of State, with no real powers. The one thing that makes me cringe at the thought of having a president with executive powers is the prospect of having a "President Thatcher". Too horrible to contemplate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 The one thing that makes me cringe at the thought of having a president with executive powers is the prospect of having a "President Thatcher". Too horrible to contemplate.'President' Thatcher may have been deleted by Cyber/cidermen, exterminated by Daleks or just plain assassinated by an English and public spirited citizen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucksred Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 'President' Thatcher may have been deleted by Cyber/cidermen, exterminated by Daleks or just plain assassinated by an English and public spirited citizen. Or used the renamed Secret Police same as the old bosses..............Wont get Fooled Agin, Gobbo. Sod all to to wi queenie, but wi unscrupulouse lying cheatin politicians...think I prefer queenie as head of state, to any of them, AND I'm a republican as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.