Alien Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 The whole lot is not convincing - it just sounds like a group of german students in the varsity on a Thursday night after university football practice :huh:Again i'm not with you. I'm sure what is said in the recording is probably word for word correct in relation to the interpretation entered by spindrift, unless you think German students chat about tank production in 42, after footie practice. I don't think spindrift or any other on here are stupid enough not to realise that there must be a percentage that speak German...even me a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 erm, it's not actually ... that name was brought into the family by Prince Albert when he married Victoria. However, they were advised to adopt the name Windsor during the Great War due to anti German sentiment. Although Royals traditionally don't have a surname, they belong to a dynasty! The Queen decided that when anyone connected with the Royal Family needed a surname it should be Mountbatten-Windsor. Which presumably is the name that William will use when he gets wed later this year? I'm not sure why I'm bothering with this, as I'm not really interested. I just can't bear to see people posting incorrect 'facts' as truth ... if you're going to post, at least get it right. ETA: I know this is wildly off topic, but I didn't introduce the red herring, but it's interesting ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Windsor via Philip, 'our' royals are now members of the House of Oldenberg. Yes, Saxe-Coburg Gotha was Albert's name. and Victoria took the name on when she married her Albrecht. However, Victoria (Princess Alexandrina Victoria, daughter of the Duke of Kkent) was a princess of Hanover, (Georges I, II, III, and IV and William IV, were Hanoverian) but despite her blood-line, she was not allowed to take a Hanoverian title due to her being female. (? ? ) her mother was a Saxe-Coburg, I think (Albrecht was her cousin) As I understand it, German was Victoria's first language, and had been the first language of the Hanovers. You are correct that the Royal Family changed their name from Saxe-Coburg Gotha by royal decree on 17 July 1917 Now, therefore, We, out of Our Royal Will and Authority, do hereby declare and announce that as from the date of this Our Royal Proclamation Our House and Family shall be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor, and that all the descendants in the male line of Our said Grandmother Queen Victoria who are subjects of these Realms, other than female descendants who may marry or may have married, shall bear the said Name of Windsor... The Mountbatten (Battenburg!) part of the name came in, when Elizabeth married Prince Philip. Mountbatten (Battenburg) being his family name. I think you are correct in saying William will be marrying under the M-W name, although, through school, and his army career, he was styled "William Wales", and Harry was "Harry Wales". My gosh isn't this all complicated. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 I'm sure you would, but it wouldn't alter the conclusion. I can't see this country, no matter how parlous our state, electing a Hitler and then allowing him free reign to establish the Nazi party. It's just not feasible. That viewpoint is understandable, and certainly intuitive, but still wrong. I remember thinking exactly the same way before I read any history books. I'm by no means an expert, but I really don't think it takes very much reading to see the error in that view. Academic historians haven't thought that way about Hitler's rise to power since the 1960s, when people finally started looking at things objectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted January 16, 2011 Author Share Posted January 16, 2011 :huh:Again i'm not with you. I'm sure what is said in the recording is probably word for word correct in relation to the interpretation entered by spindrift, unless you think German students chat about tank production in 42, after footie practice. I don't think spindrift or any other on here are stupid enough not to realise that there must be a percentage that speak German...even me a little. Until I found the recording I had no idea it existed, I'd never heard of it before. The phrase applied to the Holocaust "The Banality of Evil" could just as easily be used for that over-bearing, egotistical monologue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubydazzler Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 That viewpoint is understandable, and certainly intuitive, but still wrong. I remember thinking exactly the same way before I read any history books. I'm by no means an expert, but I really don't think it takes very much reading to see the error in that view. Academic historians haven't thought that way about Hitler's rise to power since the 1960s, when people finally started looking at things objectively.I've read plenty of history, flamingjimmy, thanks. As well as living a life. If most people cannot see that an Islamic state will ever be established in the UK due to the established character and culture of the British, surely I can be allowed my view that neither would a fascist one. We may be descended along the way from Germanic peoples but our national character is totally different. We've got a lot of Celt in us too. We're thrawn and rebellious by nature and don't like victimisation and unfairness. I can't be held responsible for the fact that some susceptible people, like spindrift, feel they could be seduced, enthralled and swayed to heinous actions by a fascist dictator? I'm saying it would never happen in the UK, you can disagree, obviously, but I know I'm right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubydazzler Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 For the third time, that wasn't what was suggested. Why are arguing against stuff nobody's said? I asked if you could imagine being held in thrall by that voice, I didn't even mention Britain. You're not the only person commenting on this thread. I was responding to another comment when I said that. Do keep up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 I've read plenty of history, flamingjimmy, thanks. As well as living a life. If most people cannot see that an Islamic state will ever be established in the UK due to the established character and culture of the British, surely I can be allowed my view that neither would a fascist one. We may be descended along the way from Germanic peoples but our national character is totally different. We've got a lot of Celt in us too. We're thrawn and rebellious by nature and don't like victimisation and unfairness. I can't be held responsible for the fact that some susceptible people, like spindrift, feel they could be seduced, enthralled and swayed to heinous actions by a fascist dictator? I'm saying it would never happen in the UK, you can disagree, obviously, but I know I'm right. I think that attitude is naive and am extremely glad for the most part that it hasn't been passed down to my generation. It is extremely important to understand how what happened in Germany happened, and to do that we must discard preconceived notions about British cultural superiority and look at things from the outside. Writing it off as some quirk of the German people that could never happen in Britain teaches us nothing, and is imo dangerously complacent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VideoPro Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Spindrift - this is not convincing at all. How do we know that the two German speakers having the conversation, are simply not two german students in the Varsity having a pint? it could be taken to mean anything, for example. German student 1 says oba doba doba doba - which means "shall I go to the bar and get some drinks?" Spindrift claims it means "Shall we invade Poland?" German student 2 says heinz veinz fritz bodoca - which means "a pint of carling for me cocker" Spindrift claims it means "yes, start with airraids, followed by ground forces" My bold. I'd be interested to know how you think that your obvious complete lack of knowledge of the German language qualifies your ability to comment at all, let alone make accusations towards Spindrift? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullerboY Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 I'm sure you would, but it wouldn't alter the conclusion. I can't see this country, no matter how parlous our state, electing a Hitler and then allowing him free reign to establish the Nazi party. It's just not feasible. I think it has had everything to do with the British character and culture. We've had numerous chances to elect fascists and we very rarely do. Although, as I've said, with the change in the culture over the last 50 years, we can't afford to be sanguine about what might happen in the future. Sorry Ruby,the NAZI party was in its early stages before Hitler became a member,He built the party into what it became and it was elected into power by a minority turn out.No matter what is said about him,he is still around 66yrs after his death,every day on TV we see programmes on him,not so of the other western leaders.The world is still fascinated by this Austrian architectural painter who rose in his life to become the leader of a nation of 80 million people.No matter what happened after has any other person achieved this power?Was he initially a madman or did circumstances change him,because he must have been under temendous pressure.I am not condoning the man but there or many ways at looking at this phenominon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted January 16, 2011 Author Share Posted January 16, 2011 If nothing else it shows what an outstanding actor Ganz is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bmkUlXp5sk&feature=related The tremors are kindly interpreted by Ganz as early onset Parkinson's, more probably amphetamine dependence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.