to think 'the sun' is utter scum over the queen's 'nazi salute' ?

[mrsfuzzy]

it might be 'historical significance' but is it really ? the film taken in 1933 shows the royal family doing nazi salutes. the 'salute' was not really known about then as to what it would come to signify and this seems scummy behaviour on behalf of the sun to print it.
everyone now involved is dead, but the queen still has to hear it,
i'm not into royalty but this seems shitty in my book.

I'm more interested in the timing of this. Presumably The Sun has had the footage for a while, but why publish now? Have they been pissed off over eg access to Prince George/Princess Charlotte? Or is there something else going on?

I'm only interested in their sex lives as a very close work colleague told me in the late 80s that Phillip regularly used a certain embassy for his "meetings" with a certain actress. She knew about it as her father worked there.

Didn't the Daily Mail publish,
"Hurrah for the Blackshirts," by Viscount Rothmere, who happened to be rather chummy with Adolf & Mussolini?
(Another triumph for the Daily Fail!)

I think the Queen can be excused though: both as a child mimicking her elders and for her record since. Not the adults - no excuses for them; if they didn't know what Hitler was like, in their position they should have made it their business to find out.

The Battle of Cable Street was a mere three years later.

Can't link as am on phone but the Nazis were in power in 1933. Their agenda was terrifyingly clear.

Edward VIII was forced to abdicate, not because of his Nazi sympathies, which were well known, but because he wanted to marry an American divorcee - says a lot, I think.

it's hardly liz's fault she's got such a dodgy family, still it makes they seem like characters out of a soap, 'dallas', 'dynasty' may be ?
there are probably a load of skeletons rattling around in the royal cupboards when truth be known !
the royals etc may have had nazi leanings but no doubt there are thousands of the great unwashed who think that immigrants should be sent home too, but that is another thread.
negative leanings into fascism spread throughout landed gentry as the world was a totally different place then. people fear/hate what they don't like/understand

I'm astonished anyone can take this so seriously.

A family in the garden, playing up to the cine camera (quite a novelty in those days). They were acting out the funny little man with a silly salute that they had seen on the newsreels. At that time no-one (except possibly Churchill) was taking Hitler seriously.

If the Sun had published the whole film instead of a selected clip we'd probably have seen them copying Charlie Chaplin with his silly walk.

It's nonsense, but hey it sells papers.

"At that time no-one (except possibly Churchill) was taking Hitler seriously."
That is simply not true

Edward VIII was forced to abdicate, not because of his Nazi sympathies, which were well known, but because he wanted to marry an American divorcee

We owe 'that woman' a very great deal for getting us rid of him. His brother and family did a lot better for Britain.

At that time no-one (except possibly Churchill) was taking Hitler seriously.

That's not true. I've read plenty of diplomatic reports from 1930-33 which indicate widespread alarm at the rise of Hitler.

Don't really care about the queen (queen mother and Prince of Wales a different matter), but it's not accurate to claim that no one worried about Hitler in 1933.

But still- if the monarchists want to paint the royal family as out of touch with both domestic and foreign affairs and generally ignorant who am I to stop them?

OK, so there were diplomatic concerns about Hitler. It's good to know that someone else was taking him seriously.

But to this family playing in the garden he was just someone with a funny characteristic that they could copy for the camera.

Auntie- it is just ridiculous to suggest that Edward 8 was as ignorant as you suggest

But to this family playing in the garden he was just someone with a funny characteristic that they could copy for the camera.

That argument might have some merit if it was the Joe Bloggs family messing around. It wasn't. It was the royal family. Who would have been aware of well-founded concerns about what Hitler's rise to power meant.

There is a difference.

And yes, the chdren may have been copying the funny characteristic they had seen on newsreels- but their grown ups should not have been encouraging it and joining in.

I don't accept that for one minute.
You're trying to push hindsight of what happened years later, into the antics of a family playing in a garden.
You cannot seriously suggest that they were playing tribute to Hitler by aping his salute.

Tangent - badders for head of state.

As I said- I am amazed that you are so determined to present the royal family as so ignorant. I suppose it's the only alternative to Nazi sympathisers....

motherinferior, baddz and anyone else better read than me, can you recommend well researched books on the mitfords et al and the Windsor monarchy as a starting point?

Badzz could you recommend any reading material?

Nancy Mitford by selina Hastings is a great book.
If you go on Amazon and put in mitfords it should bring up lots of options.
There are also the books by Decca - hons and Rebels etc
I haven't ever read anything by Diana...I just can't being myself to...anti Semitic, fascist bitch.
They really are the most fascinating family.

Just had a look at my bookshelves...
Try
Wait for me by Deborah Devonshire
The house of Mitford by Desmond Guinness
Hitlers Valkyrie
That should start you off!....