Corbyn and his lack of respect.

[Firefly]

I see that it has come to the notice of posters on FB, that Corbyn refused to sing the National Anthem at a remembrance service for the dead of WW11, he also refused to bow to the Queen yesterday. It beats me how a man, and I use the term loosely, thinks that he's fit to be our P.M. not in a million years.

Jackie

[josef k]

I think there is a difference between refusing to sing and choosing not to sing. He is, like me, a republican. I don't sing it or stand. I sit quietly whilst others who choose to sing get on with it. Neither would I bow to the Queen if I ever met her. I don't bow to anyone, I look them in the eye.

Jeremy Corbyn has principles that he sticks to, and has conducted himself with respect and dignity at all the remembrance services he has attended. I really don't think there is a need for you to insult him just because he doesn't bow and scrape.

Samuel Johnson said that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

[Dominic]

Um, MPs aren't supposed to bow to the queen then. Corbyn was following protocol. It was May who bowed when she shouldn't.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06 ... did-right/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 00661.html

[Devil]

I see that it has come to the notice of posters on FB, that Corbyn refused to sing the National Anthem at a remembrance service for the dead of WW1, he also refused to bow to the Queen yesterday. It beats me how a man, and I use the term loosely, thinks that he's fit to be our P.M. not in a million years.

Jackie

Please get your facts right. It was May who breached protocol by bowing.

[Firefly]

Yes Devil I know now, but I'm not the only one to get it wrong, but I am RIGHT about the memorial service !

Jackie

[Poppy]

I don't think she breached protocol. Protocol states who should bow but I am sure if people want to there is nothing wrong in doing so. Personally I believe it is just a small sign of respect. I agree with Jackie however that at this time when we have a royal family then we certainly need a PM that believes in and respwcts monarchy.

[Dominic]

I don't think she breached protocol. Protocol states who should bow but I am sure if people want to there is nothing wrong in doing so. Personally I believe it is just a small sign of respect. I agree with Jackie however that at this time when we have a royal family then we certainly need a PM that believes in and respwcts monarchy.

That is fine, but Corbyn shouldn't be attacked for not bowing.

[Jimgward]

It’s just typical of today’s media, ready to jump onto things and look for fault. As to people believing things from social media, I despair.

Corbyn has views that he follows, much like Dennis Skinner. May had plenty of opinions, if you don’t like one, she will give you another one.

She’s made more ewe turns than a randy Welsh farmer!

[Poppy]

No you are probably right Dominic ,unfortunately his sheer arrogance makes you want to attack him!

[PhotoLady]

A number of others have also stood and not sung the national anthem, or even worse

[Firefly]

That's as maybe Jules, but non of them are attempting to become P.M. However there is no excuse for downright rudeness. The National Anthem was in respect not only of the Monarch, but of war dead, not only that, but to appear dressed as he was, was an insult.

Jackie

[kingfisher]

Josef K.-
When Samuel Johnson said that” Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel” he was alluding to the “false patriotism” of Pitt specifically- who was a Whig. (He was what was then termed a “false patriot”). It was a one off statement which does not at all represent his view of true patriotism . And it is frequently taken out of its original context to "prove" a point.
Actually Johnson was a staunch Tory. He detested slavery, did much to further the abolition cause, and left all of his inheritance to his black manservant.
He was indeed a great patriot: He wrote in his pamphlet “the Patriot”:

A patriot is he whose publick conduct is regulated by one single motive, the love of his country; who, as an agent in parliament, has, for himself, neither hope nor fear, neither kindness nor resentment, but refers every thing to the common interest."
(N.B. Nationalism is sometimes confused with patriotism, which I feel is a neutral quality).

[Firefly]

Kingfisher

Good post.

Jackie

[josef k]

Of course you are right in the circumstances of the quote. However, my use was in line with his, namely the false patriotism of so-called patriots today. Many who claim to be patriots are in fact nationalists, with all the present day connotations that brings.

[Jimgward]

Again, there is nothing wrong with being against the monarchy, if the proper procedures are used to bring that about. It may seem quaint to some, to have a monarchy, but they should be no more than figureheads, in this modern age, in my opinion.

I can think of very litte the monarchy as an institution brings, to this modern world, other than tourism. I can think of nothing the historical monarchy brought, other than grief. We only need to go back to WW1 for evidence of that. Thank God they can no longer take us to war.

[Firefly]

No, the government do that regularly !

[kingfisher]

Jim- The overwhelming majority of historians concur that Germany, Austria/Hungary and Serbia were the main instigators of WW1. Perhaps you could outline the involvement of the British Royal family which the last sentence of your post clearly states?

[Jimgward]

Jim- The overwhelming majority of historians concur that Germany, Austria/Hungary and Serbia were the main instigators of WW1. Perhaps you could outline the involvement of the British Royal family which the last sentence of your post clearly states?

Merely that the King was overly keen on war as a well. I admit that Germany were the prime instigators, but we did our best to take part and the King was acknowledged to play a large part in that.

Onbiously prior wars to WW1 was where royalty were prime instigators.

[bromerzz]

There are times I am almost embarrassed to read the thoughts of some members of the British expat community in Cyprus. As always well said Hudswell I agree with you 100%. We have common ground as men who took the Queens shilling and served our country, putting country before self.

Long Live the Queen.

[josef k]

Oh come on! Took the queen's shilling and put country before self? Well it may have been what you did, but I question if this rather romantic view was the motivation for the majority of the armed forces. For many it was the only job they could find, and for the older amongst us it was compulsory, for example.
The squaddies I have spoken to on the subject do not go into battle thinking of Queen or country, they go into battle thinking about the welfare of their mates alongside them.