Sunday, October 28, 2007

The Duke of Edinburgh in Fine Form

A great anecdote from a speech by Gerald Howarth MP to the Young Britons' Foundation dinner. He was waiting in line to be received by the Duke of Edinburgh at a defence related event and was rather surprised when the Duke looked him up and down and said to him "What does your party stand for nowadays then?" Unabashed Gerald looked the Duke in the eye and said: "For the defence of the Kingdom, sir". The Duke of Edinburgh, looking doubtful, hit straight back with a single word. "Bollocks". There's no answer to that really.

35 comments:

Andy said...

I thought that a "great anecdote" usually has a trace of humour, irony or fascinating historical relevance to it. This is just an example of incredible rudeness. Or am I missing something?

poohbear said...

He speaks the truth AND it hurts!
What party now stands for England and her way of life and her Independence?
All the major parties now wish to deliver us into the bondage of foreigners who dont even speak English!
It breaks my heart that the modern commisars dearest wish is to see us ruled by a Soviet Union MK2! We should be in the business of smashing monalithic empires NOT builing them!

Anonymous said...

If only his wife showed the same honesty in expressing her views, the country wouldn't be in such a bloody awful mess.

Sydney said...

And what about the joke from David Cameron re one legged lithuanian lesbians? Double standards, slip of the toungue, good old fashioned Bon Homie or sackable SEXISM, or perhaps just hypocrisy. Remember the Party has been hog tied these last three years just on this subject.

aardvark said...

That is the Duke of Edinburgh's standard response to many things.

A few years ago on the morning of January 1st one of the Balmoral estate workers wished him a Happy New Year. The reply was "Bollocks".

Lady Finchley said...

How can anyone NOT love Phil the Greek! I only wish there were more no bullshit people like him around even if I don't agree with his estimation of our Party!

back cameron or get brown said...

sydney 8.29am

So Cameron has lost the one-legged Lithuanian lesbian vote. So what?

Anonymous said...

I wonder what DoE would have said if one of the peasants has uttered bollocks back to one of his comments? Rude and ignorant and with all the character of true sponger off the State. Typical immigrant, comes over here and goes to the top of the housing list.

Thats not racist or rude its really funny and fine form.

Trumpeter Lanfried said...

When one has spent nearly 60 years in public life listening to the cant and humbug of politicians the word 'Bollocks' springs readily to one's lips.

A one-legged Lithuanian lesbian said...

Titter ye not! The PC thought police [aka Sydney] are on duty.

canvas said...

I just want to know if it's the DOE that's being blackmailed for a sex and drug scandal?! LoL

Anyone know more about this 'blackmail' story?

:)

jailhouselawyer said...

And what was Gerald Howarth's response to your question that you said you was going to ask him about giving a research pass to someone who is not doing any research for him?

Liz said...

What you don't know is that Phil the Greek had Howarth in his hands so to speak. Now cough.

Wrinkled Weasel said...

Well at least we can rule him out from the "blackmail at the Palace" scandal.

I think most people will know who is the recipient of The Love That Dare Not Speak its Name (indeed it cannot, for it has its mouth full).

Well, if you live in a place that looks like a Parisien Bordello I guess you are tempted to act as if you are in one.

I shall look forward to the appearance of the "Snort and Blow" tape on the internet.

lawd haw haw said...

Wonder what he said when the morning papers hit the breakfast table...

freedom to prosper said...

Bring back Oliver Cromwell that's all I can say.
PS Doug Hoyle is a xxxx. You can fill your own word in.

nadine dorrie's toyboy said...

Phil the Greek 1 - Cameron the Geek 0!

Expat said...

Talking of the long term unemplyable, the BBC reports that "Some MPs struggle to find a new job after losing their seat and many end up earning less than they did in the House of Commons, a study suggests.
Of those who lost their seat, only 20% found a new job straight away and 40% earned less after leaving".
Confirmation that many are unemplyable and tha 60% (at least) are overpaid.

Anonymous said...

The Duke is a greek interloper. We tories should tell him where he can stick it. Labour are welcome to such a rat

Anonymous said...

The Duke has many connections to the Scotish. He is obviously a quisling. He is as English as a Zebra. What What, as he wopuld say.

Anonymous said...

Iain,

With Christmas coming, you might consider publishing a small "stocking filler" of a book, entitled:

"The Wit and Wisdom of The Duke of Edinburgh."

About two A6 pages would be enough.

Atlas shrugged said...

The Duke is a fine old stick that has done a passable (I think we can all agree) JOB at productively shaggy Her Majesty.

It always shocks me that when a person of REAL position is being honest and actually says something for a change. People in general are surprised to find out that the aristocracy of the WORLD really DO NOT care what the 'great unwashed' think of them at all.

Please try to understand these people do not care at all, and why should they?

They know their power is about as cast in stone as a pyramid and will last just as long, but no longer.

The FACT that the public genuinely believe that the Royal's do care what the prolls think. Also that the existence of the Royal family is somehow at the behest of something so transient and silly as democratic politics. Just adds to the Royal family's daily amusement.

It must make The Duke almost split his sides.

If we had the amount of age wealth property land and untouchable power of the husband of the Queen of England. I am sure most of us would become quickly even more of a callas bastard then the Duke often is.

jonny rotten said...

Bollocks=nonsense.

Remember the fuss over the Sex Pistols album?

Anonymous said...

sydney - do share the joke..

Anonymous said...

What an appallingly rude parasite this man is. If only there were a sufficiently attractive alternative to monarchy; I'd glasly see them all go to the wall.

As the first post stated, this isn't humorous; it's simply another example of extreme rudeness from a man (and a family) who have sponged off the taxpayer for far too long!

Viva el revolucion!! (a rightist one of course!)

Anonymous said...

Well said. Phillip always was my favourite Royal... I bet he votes UKIP.

Anonymous said...

He doesn't vote at all.

Lord Best said...

Amazing how few people have a sense of humour. God, if some puffed up comedian had said this we would all be laughing and telling each other what a wonderfully anti-establishment chap he was.
Also, stop with the parasite nonsense, the money the Royal Estates generates pays for the entire civil list many times over, abolish the monarchy and all that goes back to the windsows. In the meantime, continue to whine about the 11p the monarchy costs you a year.

aardvark said...

I believe the overall annual cost of the Royal Family works out at about 60p per UK resident, which is very modest (and good value).

You are assuming that in the event of the monarchy being abolished the Crown Estates (including the Duchy of Cornwall assets) would still belong to the royal family. I think that is extremely unlikely. They would almost certainly be taken over by the state. The Royal family would then be left with their personal possessions and possibly a token allowance from the state.

Neil craig said...

It was a particularly pompous bollocking deserving reply because (A) the kingdom is under no imminent serious threat (al is not a serious national threat) & (B) everybody could say (& C the real threat to the kingdom is membership of the EU which the Tories won't really say they want to end).

His question is a fair one & any political movement with life in it should be able to enunciate what it stands for in 2 sentences (possibly 1) in a way which most people will agree with & a significant minority disagree.

Re: Publican said...

Prince Phillip was described in a national newspaper last week as the monarchy's "leading moderniser". Doesn't that say something about the monarchy??

As an active republican I am happy to go into further argument about the issue, but please let's not bring these ridiculous pro-royal myths into it... the royal family does NOT own the Crown Estates, rather they are entrusted to the monarch of the day. They are not the private property of QEII or any other royal, and hence the claim that the monarchy is somehow value for money becuase it gives us revenue from Crown lands is utter tosh - if the monarchy ceased to exist the Crown lands would still be there for the benefit of the UK as a whole.

The 60p per person thing is also merely propoganda: this figure does not include security costs, costs to local councils or the loss in tax revenue due to the secretive and favourable tax arrangements enjoyed by the Windsors. It is also taking a total figure of £37m and dividing it by every man, woman and child in the country. Would we say the same about anything else? How about the recent £365,000 travel bill racked up by John Bourn, the Chairman of the NAO, which resulted in his resignation last week: "The NAO has today defended the spending by pointing out that this only amounts to half a penny per person in the UK". Think about it!! They are far more expensive than a non-executive president would be. The German president costs less than £10m per year, almost a quarter of Her Maj!

Cicero said...

As a Greek refugee, I am a little surprised that the Migration Watch lunatics have not been on to him years ago...

Mind you "B**llocks" has an unanswerable quality that the Uni-pedal Lithuanaain lesbians does not: I suspect an awful lot of bi-pedal hetrosexual Lithuanians will be quite pissed off... and of course they can vote in local and EU elections.

Oscar Miller said...

any political movement with life in it should be able to enunciate what it stands for in 2 sentences (possibly 1)

I'm with those who think the Duke was not witty but rude. But the ability for political parties to make a one/two sentence summary of their beliefs is fair. The question is - what is that sentence or two? At the moment I don't think any of the main parties could do this convincingly.

Lord Best said...

As I understand it George III exchanged the income from the Crown Estate for that of the civil list. The monarcy now costs 50 million pounds a year roughly, the crown estate generates 190 million, not to mention the vast tourist income the Monarchy generates.
Lets keep the Republican propaganda to a minimum as well eh? Does the German 10m a year take into account cost of elections very few years I wonder. If you want to trade a unique and historical Monarchy for another noxious politician you need your head examined.

Anonymous said...

Tavistock
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/tavistochumanrelations.htm
http://elliotlakenews.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/common-purpose-is-to-brainwash/