The Lives and Reputation of our Ancient Island’s Defenders of Freedom now
at greater Risk.
*
In the Daily Mail on Saturday the 24th July 2004, a timely
article by the eminent historian Max Hastings has outlined the grievous dangers
to morale of our illustrious Regiments from a politically correct Government.
* *
Death of a
Warrior Nation
Part 2
By
Max Hastings
In
the world of Posh ‘n’ Becks, which New labour manipulates so brilliantly, Dr
Johnson’s 18th century observation that
‘every
man thinks meanly of himself for not having been a soldier’ sounds ridiculous.
Gordon
Brown, to name but one, would think meanly of anyone who had wasted his time
being anything
as
pointless as a soldier.
None
of this is intended to imply regret that our generation has not been obliged to
fight a war, as our parents and grandparents did. In our time, we have every reason to be thankful that we have
been spared a great conflict of national survival.
It
was Winston Churchill (who enjoyed battle more than most men) who wrote from a
South African battlefield in 1899:
‘Ah, Horrible war, amazing
medley of the glorious and the squalid, the pitiful and sublime, if modern men
of light and leading saw your face closer, simple folk would see it hardly ever.’
Yet something is lost, something precious, when a society and its
rulers wilfully crush the link with a great tradition of honour, adventure,
manners and daring-ideals that are alien to today’s Elite as Space Flight.
I
have always thought that monstrous tyranny the Health and Safety Executive the
most potent symbol of the New Labour spirit.
This
body which would have us walk every pavement in a safety harness, which hastens
to court at the first hint of a painter up a ladder without a helmet or a
swimmer daring to brave waters without a flotation suit, is the very negation
of the old world of empire its glories and its battlefields.
Here
is Winston Churchill again, a correspondent amid the Boar War Army, magically evoking the joys of
a young man hazarding everything in action:
‘What
does it matter that this or that is misunderstood or perverted; that so-and-so
is envious and spiteful; that heavy difficulties obstruct the larger schemes of
life, clogging nimble aspiration with the mud of matters of fact?
‘Here,
life itself, life at its best and healthiest, awaits the caprice of a bullet.
Let us see the development of the day.
All else may stand over, perhaps for ever… Existence is never so sweet as when it is at hazard..’
Churchill,
contrary to the slanders of his enemies, was never a warmonger. He understood better than
any man the bloody burden which conflict lays upon the innocent. He did not wish to drag peaceful civilians
from their beds in England to share his perilous adventures.
He
merely rejoiced, like Harry Smith, in the opportunities the life of a soldier offered to those like
himself.
It
may be argued that moral courage- more common among women than men I think- is
more rare and precious than physical daring, which comes naturally to some
young blades. It has often been observed that the roll of Victoria Cross
winners includes some remarkably stupid men, because cleverer one’s were too
canny to throw themselves upon death.
Yet
healthy societies through the ages have respected courage as the most conspicuous
of military virtues, together
With
a simple willingness to risk everything for the cause of country.
The
letters written by very young warriors, doing their duty in the knowledge that
its likely outcome was death, have justly moved readers over centuries.
Consider
the extract from one written in 1941 by a young bomber pilot to his fiancée:
‘The
RAF fighters and bombers combined will undoubtedly win this war in time, but
the end isn’t in sight yet and before it is over the losses will be
enormous. I wonder how many people ever
wonder what the average flier’s outlook on life is in these times? It’s almost
entirely fatalistic. There seems no point in making any plans for the future.
‘Darling, you’ll make me easier in mind if you promise
this: until we’re married, If I should
go up as ‘missing’, don’t wait too long. If anything happens to me, I’ll want
you to do a perm, do up your face, put the hat on and carry on. If I’m unlucky
I’m prepared for anything.’
He was killed a month
later.
Such has been the
spirit of young warriors through the ages. They did not want to die, but they
accepted the risk of doing so as the hazard of their calling,
whereas New Labour would urge them to appeal to the European
Court of Human Rights.
http://thewestminsternews.co.uk
http://eutruth.org.uk
[Added-February-May/2007]
* *
*
The
Queen,
Treason
and the
Coronation
oath
Together
with
Churchill,
King
George
VI saved
our
nation;
he was a
Monarch
to be
proud
of. But
his
daughter
the
Queen is
the only
monarch
to have
broken
all her
coronation
oaths,
by
signing
these
six
treaties
that
abolish
our
common
law, the
British
Constitution,
the
British
and
English
nations,
and our
sovereignty.
She has
also
committed
treason,
together
with
co-signatories
Ted
Heath,
Margaret
Thatcher,
John
Major,
Tony
Blair
and
Gordon
Brown.
Realising
that
under
the five
Treason
Acts
they
should
already
be
hanging
by the
neck
until
dead,
Tony
Blair
and the
Queen
signed
the
Crime
and
Disorder
Act,
1998,
which
secretly
abolished
much of
the
crime of
treason
(s36.3)
and
reduced
the
penalty
to life
imprisonment
- they
didn't
tell the
MP's
what
they had
just
voted
for.
1.4
million
British
Servicemen
gave
their
lives
for our
independence.
The
Queen
has
thrown
their
sacrifices
away and
made
them
worthless.
At
no
physical
risk to
herself,
she
could
have
fulfilled
her oath
and duty
as a
constitutional
check
and
balance,
by
refusing
to sign
the six
treaties
until an
in/out
referendum
had been
held. In
the
unlikely
event
the vote
went
against
her, she
was even
more
unlikely
to lose
her
crown
(not her
life or
a limb),
and
would
keep her
£9
billion
plus
palaces
either
way.
Those
servicemen's
lives
would
still
have
meant
something.
But she
was
always
keen to
sign;
and said
in
advance
she
would
sign the
last
treaty.
Princes
Charles,
William
or Harry
can now
never be
King.
You
can't
have a
King
without
a
Kingdom:
they can
only be
princes
of a
region
(principality)
within
Europe.
King
Edward
8th was
forced
to
abdicate
because
he was
too
overt as
a German
Nazi
supporter.
Mrs
Simpson's
divorce
was
merely
the
excuse.
The
Royal
Family
is a
German
Family -
real
surname
Saxe-Coburg Gotha.
Windsor
is an
adopted
surname.
All four
of
Prince
Phillip's
sisters
married
high
ranking
German
Nazis.
After
they
lost the
war the
EU was
switched
from a
Nazi
basis to
a
communist
basis.
Between
the ages
of 12
and 22
Queen
Elisabeth's
political
and
constitutional
tutor
was Sir
Henry
Martin,
a Fabian
Communist.
It seems
clear
she was
well
trained
for her
subversion
and
treason.
Because
she
waves
and
smiles
at us
most are
fooled
into
thinking
she's
lovely;
in fact
the
Queen is
a member
of the
Illuminati,
a
Bilderberger,
head of
Freemasonry,
is
wholly
pro the
(German)
EU, and
has
abolished
this
nation
with
ruthless
determination.
It is so
obvious
she
cares
nothing
for
Britain
or the
British.
The
Queen's
aspirations
are not
ours;
she
clearly
serves a
much
darker
master;
the
faith
she
defends
cannot
be the
one we
think it
is. King
George
VI, the
one
recent
monarch
not
indoctrinated
with
Nazi or
Communist
philosophy,
must be
turning
over in
his
grave.
I
ask that
the law
be
enforced,
and the
Queen be
tried
for
treason
before
12
honest
people,
and not
by our
corrupt
judges.
And that
the
illegal
section
36.3
Crime
and
Disorder
Act be
declared
null and
void, so
that she
can hang
by the
neck
till
dead.
The new
EU
Hitler
doesn't
have to
get
elected
Its
worth
noting
that
Adolf
Hitler
first
had to
get
elected,
if on a
35%
minority
vote,
and then
get his
Enabling
Act
passed.
An EU
dictator
has no
such
problems.
Our EU
rulers
do not
submit
themselves
for
election
now. And
the
Queen
has
already
signed
the
Enabling
Act
(Civil
Contingencies
Act
2004).
The EU's
Hitler
will
have a
much
easier
rise to
power,
and will
have the
formerly
British
and
French
nuclear
weapons
from day
one.
Adolf
Hitler
killed
54
million
people.
The EU's
dictator
could
kill a
billion
at the
touch of
a
button,
with no
democratic
checks
and
balances
to
answer
to. How
could
any
aspiring
dictator
resist
the EU
opportunity?
For more
details go to :http://eutruth.org.uk
http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants2012.html |
|
|
*