[QUEEN] All Brits: congratulations!

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 08:08

After yesterdays wonderful news about Prince William and (Princess) Katy - today there's another reason to congratulate all Brits on this board! 1558: Elizabeth I became Queen! Upon the death of her sister Mary, Elizabeth Tudor became Queen of England amid bonfires and much ringing of bells. She would not be officially crowned until January. Good news to begin your day, isn't it?

Rottolover



Joined: 21/06/2009
Posts: 519

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 08:28

Hi Hans...that sure is wonderful news for all British people here! I do enjoy your forays into historical information.



Could you perhaps do a few pieces on Australia as well?

HildySmith


Joined: 02/07/2009
Posts: 1708

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 08:29

Yes she was the first emancepated woman

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 09:23

RE msg 2, Rottolover: (...) Could you perhaps do a few pieces on Australia as well? (...)

=> OK. How's this to start YOUR day... This is 'official': "The first records of European mariners sailing into 'Australian' waters occurs around 1606, and includes their observations of the land known as Terra Australis Incognita (unknown southern land). The first ship and crew to chart the Australian coast and meet with Aboriginal people was the Duyfken captained by a Dutchman, Willem Janszoon."

But! Australia was possibly discovered by... a Chinese admiral and his Chinese fleet in... 1421! Remains of their settlement in the Northern part of Australia are still there.

So we can finally say that Australia has some "real history"...

Rottolover



Joined: 21/06/2009
Posts: 519

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 09:42

Thanks Dutch, that's fascinating. They actually built a full-sized replica of the Duyfken and sailed it to Australia a few years ago.



In fact, the Dutch East India Company (the VOC) was a major player in the early days of European contact with the coastline of my state, Western Australia. They even left quite a few of their vessels on some of its reefs and shores...the story of the Batavia is particularly interesting, if gruesome.



But "real history"? I'm not sure our Aboriginal population would enjoy that term too much, as they had somewhere in the neighbourhood of 100,000 years of history before the white man came.

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 10:21

RE msg 5, Rottolover: (...) But "real history"? I'm not sure our Aboriginal population would enjoy that term too much (...)

=> I agree, with my apologies. I was careless when I wrote that jokingly. And I agree again re: the Batavia. A Dutch pharmacist aboard the Batavia, whose role in the tragedy was pure evil and so was his final hour!, lived in Haarlem (where I used to live for roughly 20 years). His house in the Grote Houtstraat is still standing and although 99,99% of the many passers by have no idea what was plotted there centuries ago - I always remembered details of the Batavia story when I walked past the house!

P.S. Would love to visit Western Australia, but you can't have it all in life!

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 10:25

Thanks Hans. I may take a minutes silence to reflect on this.

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 10:37

RE msg 7, No1Doyen: Reflect on what, Bill?!

racoonchic



Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3223

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 13:42

thats his polite way of telling you to shut up

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 13:56

Re msg 9: Ah! More mumbling from the swamps. Ignored - as usual.

racoonchic



Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3223

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 13:57

not completley ignored

gromit


Joined: 28/10/2010
Posts: 75

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 14:11

On this day:



On this day in 1421, a storm in the North Sea batters the European coastline. Over the next several days, approximately 10,000 people in what is now the Netherlands died in the resulting floods.



The lowlands of the Netherlands near the North Sea were densely populated at the time, despite their known vulnerability to flooding. Small villages and a couple of cities had sprung up in what was known as the Grote Waard region. The residents built dikes throughout the area to keep the water at bay, but fatal floods still struck in 1287, 1338, 1374, 1394 and 1396. After each, residents fixed the dikes and moved right back in after the floods.



On this day:



Nov 17, 1869:



The Suez Canal, connecting the Mediterranean and the Red seas, is inaugurated in an elaborate ceremony attended by French Empress Eugénie, wife of Napoleon III.

dozza67


Joined: 11/07/2008
Posts: 607

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 14:14

Thank you for your congratulations Hans. Now that we have returned to UK, this is great news for us (well, most of us) Methinks racoonchic has nothing better to do or got out of bed the wrong side this morning. There is always someone to pour cold water onto things. I enjoyed your words on Australia even though I have nothing to do with the country. Keep it up.

Clarissa2


Joined: 12/06/2009
Posts: 1476

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 14:39

Re : Msg 8,



"Reflect on what, Bill?! "





The meaning of life, the universe, and everything...

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 17:09

RE msg 13, dozza67: (...) Methinks racoonchic has nothing better to do or got out of bed the wrong side this morning. (...)

=> Dozza67, one can fight everything in this world, but one cannot fight stupidity on this board by people who want to underline their intellectual profundity. Tonight Racoonchic most probably won't "contribute" to C44 because there is football on TV. May it be a long match - with France winning, so a dozen threads can be started about Rooney and other failing gold diggers.

newscoop


Joined: 23/12/2007
Posts: 2197

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 18:13

Hans;



I think you'll find Rooney isn't playing.

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 18:17

RE msg 16, Newscoop: (...) Hans, I think you'll find Rooney isn't playing. (...)

▶ Newscoop, what's the difference..?!

___________________________________________

Think different (the best ever pple slogan)

phylray



Joined: 21/09/2007
Posts: 1727

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 21:41

Hans In my long experience, it seems to me that other countries can see the value of our monarchy

and are interested in it. Most will be happy at this event, and I am sure it will be a lovely wedding.

Many people were reacting the same at the wedding of the then, Princess Elizabeth and Philip, as an

extravagance after the war, but in the end, millions enjoyed it after so much misery.

They seem very fine young people, and I hope they will do well, for the country too, and the world.

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 22:41

RE msg 18, phylray: It is the democratic right of any nation to have the Head of State it prefers. I find a monarchy and a king or queen outdated (medieval) and I'm pleased to see their political influence slowly degrade in almost every country (kingdom). No monarchy will survive this century (but unfortunately neither will I).

Your Head of State, HM Queen Elisabeth and her family, is 40 times as expensive as the President of France (who, as a bonus to the people, can be sent away by the people after four years if he/she fails).

A king or queen with political influence is an anachronism and utterly undemocratic - nobody is born a professor and what have you, why would someone be born king or queen?!

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 23:08

Hans. Message 8. I wanted to reflect on the history of our great nation. That's all.

hwilde


Joined: 16/09/2010
Posts: 230

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 23:12

DutchCrusader



Who cares what your think about our monarchy? No one. You are just a foreigner and are not significant where they are concerned.





**** Perhaps you should reacquaint yourself with rule 3 !

Simbas

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 23:24

RE msg 21, hwilde: Ignored.

hwilde


Joined: 16/09/2010
Posts: 230

Message Posted:
17/11/2010 23:27

But you didn't ignore it did you. You had to answer even though you had no answer. Your views as a foreigner are of no significance.

MsGarnet


Joined: 04/01/2009
Posts: 989

Message Posted:
18/11/2010 02:34

hwilde - what an ignorant oaffish bully you are - no-one can speak for the views of others

simbas



Joined: 16/07/2007
Posts: 5943

Message Posted:
18/11/2010 04:59

Msg 21 , edited

Simbas

ceg123


Joined: 20/04/2009
Posts: 405

Message Posted:
18/11/2010 06:44

Msg 2

http://www.nla.gov.au/pub/gateways/issues/83/story01.html

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
18/11/2010 08:01

RE msg 26, ceg123: I bought the book here in TRNC and it is very interesting - though controversial - indeed! If some Australian in TRNC (or someone else of course) would like to borrow it, mail me at mcf.trnc@gmail.com . Fascinating story!

gromit


Joined: 28/10/2010
Posts: 75

Message Posted:
18/11/2010 14:29

DC



You may be an anti Monarchist, but look at the detail.



The British Monarchy bring in over £1bn pa in revenue net (after costs).

Next years Royal wedding is expected to bring in £1bn on it's own.

The Queen carries out over 500 functions a year. Not bad for a pensioner!

Other Royals, e.g. Princess Anne and the Duke of York work equally hard worldwide.

They are part of our Medieval History. (surely of interest to you?).

They have freely allowed their role to change to not having political influence.

90% of foreign tourists visit at least 1 Royal establishment.



Overall they are of a great benefit to our Country.



Something to be proud of.

suehowlittle


Joined: 31/10/2010
Posts: 1202

Message Posted:
18/11/2010 15:54

Hear Hear! Well said you Patriotic Citizen! Proud of you.



I love our history and our traditions and think the Royal Family are an asset to Britain, I am so pleased that Labour have now gone, they would have tried to 'abolish' everything that makes us British.



But I also think that EVERYONE is entitled to their views and sometimes people on here are shockingly rude and narrow minded with opinions which do not mirror their own.



I am sure there is absolutely no need for it and the forum is getting a 'bad name' because of it.



Lets be a little more respectful please.

suehowlittle


Joined: 31/10/2010
Posts: 1202

Message Posted:
18/11/2010 15:57

sorry, fingers quicker than brain. Meant to say 'when opinions do not mirror their own'

phylray



Joined: 21/09/2007
Posts: 1727

Message Posted:
18/11/2010 23:23

I don't think for one moment that Labour would have abolished the Monarchy. Don't you know how well

Harold Wilson got on with E.R? It is a monarchy by popular consent, and if you took a referendum I think

most would like to keep it for reasons some of which outlined above. Alternative? Boring old president.

Don't like some of the hangers on, but the Queen has always done her duty, as she sees it. It will change

inevitably, but it may survive for a while. Long May She Reign