Charles compares Putin to Hitler

[poppet2]

You only have to look at the diplomatic problems caused by Prince Philip to understand what as disaster King George would be.

 

What diplomatic problems?

And what has baby George got to do with it?

[erebus]

The Siege of Leningrad by Nazi Germany during World War II lasted from September 1941 to January 1944, and was one of the longest and deadliest in history. About 750,000 civilians are estimated to have starved and frozen to death, many of whom are buried in mass graves at the Piskaryovskoye cemetery.

For Putin the siege of Leningrad means not just the tragic pages of the country's history. It is associated with highly personal, family history connected with the fate of his parents, with the death of his elder brother, Putin's mother lived throughout the siege in Leningrad, experiencing all the hardships. Once, his mother lost consciousness and people around thought that she died and was put together with dead bodies

Puitin's father, a serviceman of the 86th rifle division participated in the defence of the city -- on the Nevsky Pyatachok. He was heavily wounded by grenade fragments and was placed in a Leningrad hospital where he was sharing his food ration with the wife who was visiting him, thereby saving her from a death from famine.

 

So good Old Prince Charles, if you want to really insult Putin, why not associate him with the primary cause of his family’s suffering, Hitler and the Nazis who were out to exterminate everyone in Leningrad. Real informed tabloid ignorance if ever there was any, but it all helps to feed the ignorant with food for their prejudices.

[tinfoilhat]

The Siege of Leningrad by Nazi Germany during World War II lasted from September 1941 to January 1944, and was one of the longest and deadliest in history. About 750,000 civilians are estimated to have starved and frozen to death, many of whom are buried in mass graves at the Piskaryovskoye cemetery.

For Putin the siege of Leningrad means not just the tragic pages of the country's history. It is associated with highly personal, family history connected with the fate of his parents, with the death of his elder brother, Putin's mother lived throughout the siege in Leningrad, experiencing all the hardships. Once, his mother lost consciousness and people around thought that she died and was put together with dead bodies

Puitin's father, a serviceman of the 86th rifle division participated in the defence of the city -- on the Nevsky Pyatachok. He was heavily wounded by grenade fragments and was placed in a Leningrad hospital where he was sharing his food ration with the wife who was visiting him, thereby saving her from a death from famine.

 

So good Old Prince Charles, if you want to really insult Putin, why not associate him with the primary cause of his family’s suffering, Hitler and the Nazis who were out to exterminate everyone in Leningrad. Real informed tabloid ignorance if ever there was any, but it all helps to feed the ignorant with food for their prejudices.

 

Yes its hitlers fault Putin is a nutter.

[whiteowl]

Yes its hitlers fault Putin is a nutter.

 

+Like

 

Despite what's happened in the past, Putins annexing of Crimea does ring quite a lot of similarity to the annexing of Sudetenland by the Nazi's in the 1930's. Caution should be advised in my opinion.

[Harleyman]

It takes a big stretch of the imagination to compare Putin to Hitler. Pretty stupid comparison in fact.

 

Stalin would have been nearer the mark

[aliceBB]

You only have to look at the diplomatic problems caused by Prince Philip to understand what as disaster King George would be.

 

Run that past us again?

 

(Oh, sorry poppet2 - just seen your post! Let's hope for an answer).

 

And I'll not hear a word said against 'Man Belong Lady Queen' or whatever they call PP in Vanuatu. You can take diplomacy too far! He just redresses the balance a bit. But I'd love to be privy to the conversation at bedtime between him and 'the wife' after he makes such 'foot-in-mouth' gaffes...

[I1L2T3]

What diplomatic problems?

And what has baby George got to do with it?

 

Prince Philip is another royal who can't keep his mouth shut. Charles is a chip off the old block.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1848553.stm

 

Prince Charles in the event of becoming king does not have to rule as King Charles. He can choose a different regnal name. George is believed to be a possible name (it's one of his middle names) so if he chose that he would be King George VII.

[aliceBB]

I still don't understand why anyone in the royal tribe should have to keep their mouth shut. If they come out with too much rubbish, perhaps the monarchy will finally be seen for what it is and disbanded. We live in hope.

 

However in this case it was a private conversation and should not have been reported.

[I1L2T3]

I still don't understand why anyone in the royal tribe should have to keep their mouth shut. If they come out with too much rubbish, perhaps the monarchy will finally be seen for what it is and disbanded. We live in hope.

 

However in this case it was a private conversation and should not have been reported.

 

A conversation on an official engagement that took place within earshot of a Daily Mail reporter. That would not be my definition of a private conversation.

 

He needs to keep his mouth shut on political matters when out in public. End of story.

[LeMaquis]

I still don't understand why anyone in the royal tribe should have to keep their mouth shut. If they come out with too much rubbish, perhaps the monarchy will finally be seen for what it is and disbanded.

 

That's one reason why they have to be as neutral and inoffensive as possible, to protect themselves from opposition. Another is that they're supposed to be representatives of the UK abroad and smiling, waving and talking banal nonsense is enough to prevent diplomatic incidents like this one. Another still is that in a democracy our representatives should be elected and not through birth be in a position to decide policy depending on who they're talking to at the time.