The Monarchist 2.0

"I have always thought that what we have to do with the royal family is integrate them as far as possible into the human race."

- Vera Baird, Her Majesty's Solicitor General for England and Wales

(On the matter of repealing male primogeniture and the current law favouring hereditary succession of males to the British throne.)

Who here wishes to parse the assumptions of that little bute?

Read the full article >>

There is no evidence that the Duke of Edinburgh ordered Diana's execution.
- British coroner Lord Justice Scott Baker

Thank God our dirty raincoat show for the world is finally over. 10 years and £10 million too late, as far as the taxpayer is concerned. The Phony Pharoah is -- surprise, surprise -- undeterred that his farce of a conspiracy theory was found wanting, his preposterous claim that the Princess was murdered by M16 and the British Monarchy, with the sole exception of the Queen. We can only assume he didn't include the Queen because he calculated this would not go over well with Her subjects, whereas Prince Charles and Prince Philip are fair game, given their less than perfect past in the minds of the public. Al-Fayed may be crazy and twisted, but he is no dummy.

It was, of course, long ago established that the man is a rather loathsome figure with a dishonourable past. There was the Department of Trade Inquiry into his purchase of Harrods; there was his maliciously false accusation that Rowland Rowans stole millions in jewelry from his store; there was his cash for questions scandal, for which MPs were paid for asking questions on his behalf, who were later dismissed or imprisoned; there was his arrest by the police, for which he sued and lost; and there were his numerous fruitless attempts to gain British citizenship, but denied on the grounds of proven bad character. Yet, for all of this, for the last 10 years he was handed a public soapbox and the circus platform opportunity to air his multiple grievances against the State.

The real conspiracy here is not a conspiracy to murder but a conspiracy to marry. The not so blind truth was surely his desire to manipulate his son to marry Princess Diana for the purpose of fathering him semi-royal grandchildren, in order to win him influence the world over, including with his public enemies. And the tragic outcome of his behaviour, of manoeuvering against the monarchy and against his enemies, is that a father lost a son and a people lost a Princess. End of sad story.

So goodbye and good riddance to the Phoney Pharaoh. You have entertained us long enough.

Read the full article >>

Posted by Iain Dale, Ian Dale's Diary

I'm sitting on the train back to RTW (that's Royal Tunbridge Wells for the uninitiated!), feeling disgusted. If you have read the Evening Standard's report of the Phoney Pharoah's so-called 'evidence' to the Diana coroner's hearing, you will understand why. If there is a more odious, despicable man than Mohammed Fayed in public life in this country then I have yet to come across him. He wouldn't know the meaning of the word honesty if it was explained to him by Mother Teresa herself. The man has the moral standing of a skunk.

He reckons that Tony Blair personally ordered the assassination of Princess Diana. He believes the following list of people were involved in the conspiracy. Brace yourselves...

The Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Charles, Robin Cook, Diana's sister Sarah, the two doctors at the Paris hospital who treated her, Paul Burrell, Sir Paul Condon, Sir John Stevens and Diana' best friend Rosa Monckton.

Most laughably of all, he now reckons his drunk employee Henri Paul had also been paid by Mi6. This rather ignores the fact that he was killed too.

And this is the man who convinced a jury that Neil Hamilton was guilty!

The fact is that there are two people to blame for that crash - and both their surnames are Fayed - Dodi for allowing Henri Paul to drive the car and his father for employing a drunk driver in the first place.

Fayed concocts these ridiculous conspiracy theories in order to mask the guilt he ought to be feeling himself.

Do feel free to join me in my longstanding boycott of the Phoney Pharoah's little grocery store.

Read the full article >>

The Queen and Duke of Edinburgh leave the building from whence Her Majesty's funeral address to the nation was delivered earlier today.

ON A DATE FOREVER TO BE GRIEVED AND BEWAILED as "British Non-Independence Day", Gordon Brown signed the constitutional Treaty of Lisbon on behalf of what was hitherto known as "Great Britain". The reform treaty creates a permanent EU President and a High Representative for foreign affairs, as well as a legal personality for the EU, allowing it to sign international treaties. For all intents and purposes, these are the imperfect powers of a confederal republic with an appointed executive as head of state.

With one fell swoop, Gordon Brown does away with a thousand years of British independence by signing the European Union's new quasi-constitution on 13 December 2007.

When asked what discernible feat of national self-interest he hoped to achieve in permanently subordinating Britain to an unelected and foreign presidency, Prime Minister Brown was heard to mutter something along the lines of preserving British influence within the councils of Europe. When pushed for a further treatment of the matter on how such influence would be maintained with world leaders henceforth looking to Brussels to negotiate matters of global concern, Mr. Brown insisted that the new constitutional powers of the president would effectively be limited to "the right to be consulted, the right to advise and the right to warn." The prime minister further demurred that the power to sign international treaties was merely a formality akin to Her Majesty granting Royal Assent to Acts of United Kingdom legislation. When asked if he was replacing the Queen as head of state, the prime minister offered no comment but appeared genuinely bemused by the question.

Meanwhile, in what clearly must be construed as a difference of opinion, Her Majesty declared a thousand days of mourning in symbolic recognition of Britain's official departure from its millenia of sovereign independence from the continent of Europe. Gathering around the Queen to mark this melancholy occasion, and appearing dignifiedly distraught, the Royal Family and other dignitaries stood in hushed and black-clad awe worthy of a state funeral procession. Prince Philip in particular, standing next to the Queen, managed to compose his features in an expression said to be 'grave even to severity', while Her Majesty's televised funeral address to the nation took on a 'gloom of affectionate despair'. Her Majesty vowed that she would continue serving Britain's interests to the best of her ability, but which now required that she represent them as Queen of Canada, Queen of Australia or Queen of Something, rather than as official representative to the President of Europe in the EU state province of Britain and Northern Ireland.

The Prime Minister of Canada is reported to be delighted at the news, and issued a press release announcing that Her Majesty will be replacing Governor General Michaëlle Jean as local Commander-in-Chief when the Queen of Canada takes up official residence at Rideau Hall early in the new year.

Read the full article >>

The National Post asks what is becoming of Rideau Hall? Indeed. The article below by Julie Smyth is not for the loyalist and constitutionalist faint of heart. The whole thing smacks of Lèse majesté, a conscious endeavor by the governor-general and her staff to downgrade the Queen and our royal history in order to be more "relevant", "modern" and "contemporary" to Canadians. Obviously the governor-general as the personal representative of Her Majesty is not one who should be downplaying the royal connection, undermining the Crown and hollowing out the symbolic power of the monarchy, yet that is exactly what Her Excellency and her staff are doing to further their own particular tastes and agendas. Sticking royal portraits in bathrooms and cloakrooms, segregating British governors-general off to more obscure corners of the official residence and relegating the only image of Her Majesty to the back wall in order to make room for more "edgy" contemporary art is an outrage. The Crown is not some stuffy relic of the past, but an honourable institution that is central to our country's story. Who in the blazes do they think they are?

by Julie Smyth, National Post

Just months after Michaelle Jean took over as Governor-General, she made a change that would begin to alter the look and feel of Rideau Hall. She replaced the showpiece art in the Ballroom, where prime ministers and Cabinet are sworn in and where the country's highest honours, such as the Order of Canada, are handed out at the official residence.

Ms. Jean was visiting The Confederation Centre of the Arts, and spotted a 1964 work by the late Quebec artist Jean Paul Lemieux called Charlottetown Revisited, which represents the Fathers of Confederation and the turning point in Canada's history.

Her choice bumped a 1979 portrait of the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh with Parliament Hill in the background. That portrait, also by Mr. Lemieux, is now on the back wall. The switch was made to better reflect Ms. Jean's vision -- she wanted a strong image of Canada.

One shift led to another: A large painting of Queen Victoria that used to be at the back of the Ballroom was relocated to the Tent room, where the Governor-General hosts large dinners. The Ballroom acquired smaller images of Queen Victoria and her husband, which were hung in a corner.

The changes have continued, as a tour this week revealed, and are part of a deliberate effort by Ms. Jean to make the home more relevant, contemporary and a showcase for Canadian work that reflects stories about Canada. But as a result, Ms. Jean, who is an avid art lover, is highlighting paintings that draw less and less on the office's British traditions.

While the governor-general represents the Queen in this country, the increased emphasis on Canada means less on the royal family past or present. The Lemieux portrait is the only one of the Queen on display. "That's it as far as Her Majesty is concerned," said Fabienne Fusade, interpretation and exhibition planner at Rideau Hall. "We really want to create a Canadian interior. So some of the old furniture pieces, part of our history, they are very important, we don't want to get rid of them but ... it is all about Canada."

The changes include a gradual shift to modernize the art that predates Ms. Jean's time in office. No longer in the residence: a more traditional portrait of the Queen, as well as images of the Queen's father, King George VI, and the Queen Mother that once graced the entrance. They are now in the Senate. "They were huge ... and they did not really speak to people. It wasn't relevant any more," says Ms. Fusade. "They had become a bit of an anachronism here. It fit when you thought of the history of the place ... but it did not fit any more with the current role of the Governor-General. That is certainly something that Ms. [Adrienne] Clarkson started to change and with Ms. Jean it has taken a more edgy feeling to it."

Some works by British artists have been put in storage or relocated to other residences by the National Capital Commission, which looks after the Crown collection of art.

Some royal portraits have been moved from a drawing room to near the lower-level staff entrance, cloakroom and public toilets. These include: two portraits of Princess Louise of Prussia, Duchess of Connaught, who was married to the Duke of Connaught, the son of Queen Victoria and the first member of the royal family to become governor- general of Canada, as well as a portrait of Princess Helena, daughter of Queen Victoria.

The paintings have been grouped into a "spouses theme." Portraits of spouses also line the stairwell leading to the area with the public washrooms, which has not amused some wives of former governors-general; the National Capital Commission is trying to compensate by repainting the area to make it a "more prestigious" space.

There is some royal art -- Queen Alexandra and King Edward -- outside the suite for visiting heads of state.

The art collection manoeuvring is one of many ways Ms. Jean is setting a more modern tone; she has established a video blog to discuss art with Canadians, introduced a provocative modern exhibition from Montreal and wants to use the home to celebrate young Canadian artists as much as possible. Even her private quarters are a reflection of a different era at the home -- she has converted a bedroom that once housed a chapel put in by Georges Vanier, a devoted Catholic, into living space to accommodate her young daughter Marie-Eden. The chapel's furniture -- pews, chairs and an altar that are Canadian antiques -- have been relocated to another space designated as an ecumenical chapel. She has also added a swing set in the private back garden for her daughter.

Throughout the home, the art collection has been grouped in themes to reflect her vision, so the large portrait of Queen Victoria is now on show with the portraits of all British-born governors- general, the idea being to keep history in one place. The front entrance of Rideau Hall now showcases portraits of Canadian- born governors-general as a way of making a big impression upon entering the home.

One of the biggest indicators of Ms. Jean's goals is the Ambassadors' Room, a space for rotating art exhibits, which houses the contemporary work of five Quebec artists she selected from the Musee d'art contemporain de Montreal. Some are abstract in nature and one, Vivre aux depens d'autrui, a 2003 work by Michel Boulanger, centres on Disney-inspired cartoons to display more serious messages. The title translates to "Living at the expense of others" and shows a series of characters, including one holding a gun to another's head. Much of the art in the exhibit is provocative and the intent is to stimulate debate.

For her office, Ms. Jean has chosen an abstract piece, also on loan from the Musee d'art contemporain de Montreal ? Paul Emile Borduas' Sans titre (no. 66).

The pine-panelled Pauline Vanier Room, named after the former governor-general's spouse, has been updated with several newer pieces of art. The room, which is used for meetings with visiting heads of state, includes a 1996 work by David Thauberger called Food Shoppe, and a 2001 painting by Charles Pachter called Shadow Barn.

The Reception Room, the oldest room in the residence, which once held portraits of governors-general, is full of Canadian art selected by Ms. Jean, including works by Alberta-born William Kurelek from the 1970s that depict the story of Ukrainian immigrants coming to Canada. There is also a 1991 piece by Vancouver-born Wanda Koop, Untitled #4 (Notes for Prelude to War), of a robot representing the growing role of technology in warfare.

"This is the hub of Rideau Hall ... so it was very important for her to make a strong impression, Also, there are a lot of photo ops that happen here -- to have a portrait as a background is not really great," says Ms. Fusade, "to have contemporary art speaks more about today."

The following is an editorial response in today's National Post

The downgrading of the Queen of Canada and her family at Rideau Hall was reported on by Julie Smyth in Saturday's National Post. Royal portraits have been systematically deported to more obscure positions; some have been moved out of the building altogether.

Rideau Hall is not "Canada's national home," as the Governor- General's Web site now says. It is the home of the representative of Queen Elizabeth, and it is not primarily an art gallery, as the current resident, Michaelle Jean, and her staff seem to think. To be sure, this nationally important house should appeal in various ways to Canadians and also to visitors from abroad. Like all human beings, we have eyes through which our minds, imaginations and sensibilities are shaped. But our lives as visual creatures should not displace our allegiance to our head of state, our constitutional order and our history.

History itself has been demoted and ghettoized, the British-born governors general being ethnically profiled and their portraits grouped with Queen Victoria.

These moves may or may not be stealth republicanism, or an attempted constitutional amendment by curatorial decree. But Ms. Jean and her staff are evidently trying to siphon off the great symbolic power of the monarchy, to further their particular tastes and agendas. If they continue on this path, they will undermine a highly honourable office, and consequently validate the warnings offered by Ms. Jean's detractors at the time she was appointed.

Read the full article >>

By David Smith, The Observer

The slavery bicentenary service was about 45 minutes old and running as smoothly and sombrely as any usual major national commemoration at Westminster Abbey: the singing of hymns, readings from the Bible and an air of inviolable solemnity.

All this was shattered when, from behind my seat in Poets' Corner, a man strode rapidly into the space in front of the altar and began screaming at the top of his voice. The Queen, Prince Philip, Tony and Cherie Blair, John and Pauline Prescott, Gordon and Sarah Brown and the Archbishop of Canterbury watched in stunned disbelief. The bright-shirted black demonstrator, Toyin Agbetu of the African rights organisation Ligali, was only a dozen feet from all of them, with apparently no security guards to block him.

The Archbishop had just delivered his main address and the service had moved on to "confession and absolution". But the reading was stopped in its tracks by Mr Agbetu's outburst: "You should be ashamed. We should not be here. This is an insult to us. I want all the Christians who are Africans to walk out of here with me!"

In a deeply worrying sign in this supposedly terrorist-conscious era, the security guards near my seat were so utterly surprised that they only looked at each other, uncertain whether to intervene. Finally, they did. Seven guards and two ushers gathered around Mr Agbetu and a hand was placed on his arm.

"Let go of me!" he yelled, raising his arms like a suspect confronted by armed police. "I have no weapon! I have no weapon!"

The Queen, on a raised platform and out of Mr Agbetu's immediate reach, watched with pursed lips. The Duke of Edinburgh frowned. Neither seemed frightened for their safety. In the pews, Mr Blair watched with dismay as if already preparing a speech about this "regrettable incident". Mr Brown, whose eyes had been sleepy, was jolted awake. Kwame Kwei-Armah, the actor and writer, dressed in a glittering golden African robe, watched with sorrow in his eyes.

The more that the security men tried to manhandle Mr Agbetu, the more he resisted. Suddenly the interruption turned serious. There were pushes and shoves, even punches. Twice Agbetu and several bodies went crashing into the knees of appalled guests, who were wearing their smartest suits and dresses. All the while Mr Agbetu's bellowing was drowning out the now superfluous service, which had tried to resume.

By now many guests and journalists around me were on their feet, straining to look. There was a sense of danger and drama. It was clear Mr Agbetu would not go quietly. Possibly not without a fight.

After what seemed an eternity, Mr Agbetu was shuffled towards the quire, in the direction of the exit. But he pointed at the Queen and yelled: "You, the Queen, should be ashamed!" The monarch did her national duty by remaining icy calm.

Mr Agbetu was now directly beneath the prime minister. He turned to face him and Mr Blair glared back. The thousands of guests watched in hushed anticipation, wondering what would come next, wondering if Mr Agbetu might even leap on him. Instead the protester screamed: "You should say sorry!"

Mr Agbetu continued walking and shuffling, still resisting the hands being placed on him, still shouting his dissent. Hundreds more guests in the nave got to witness the spectacle. The abbey's ushers still looked unsure quite how to handle him. Finally, outside the building, Mr Agbetu was not bundled away as might be expected. Instead, he gave an impromptu press conference.

"I had always planned to make this demonstration," he said. "The Queen has to say sorry. It was Elizabeth I. She commanded John Hawkins to take his ship. The monarch and the government and the church are all in there patting themselves on the back."

Finally, two police officers took him away for questioning. The service continued to the end but the sepulchral calm had gone. When the guests emerged they were not talking about William Wilberforce.

Read the full article >>

The most prominent - indeed legendary - heretic alive in the British Crown Commonwealth today, is a Scottish Nationalist Republican by the name of Ian Hamilton. His is an act of pure, premeditated sacrilege. Leading an expedition of Scottish nationalist students to Westminster Abbey on Christmas Eve, 1950, his singular act of ballsy thievery in swiping the Stone of Scone, the coronation stone, from St. Edward's Chair, makes the accumulated rantings and lifetime treachery of creatures like George Galloway seem trite in comparison. That he broke the ancient stone in two pieces while attempting to escape from the Abbey, amplifies his larceny from a mere "touch of treason" (to use his own autobiographical words), to a crime against humanity's great treasures. Thanks to his perfidy, the Stone of Destiny is now a reconstructed Scottish ruin.

Two images of the Stone of Scone under the seat of King Edward's Chair in Westminster Abbey, the traditional coronation chair of English monarchs since Edward I commissioned it in 1296 to house the historic rock. The Stone of Destiny, the ancient coronation stone of Scottish Kings and Queens, was captured as a spoil of war by King Edward from its Scone, Perth resting place, and brought to Westminster where it sat for 700 years, as a symbol of monarchical power and dominion over Great Britain. The Stone was permanently loaned to Scotland in 1996, and now sits in Edinburgh Castle.

Upon learning this gross betrayal against the King in the dead of the night, the British Government became understandably apoplectic, and ordered a major search for the stone, which turned up some three months later on the altar of Arbroath Abbey, in the safekeeping of the Church of Scotland. In "repatriating" the busted jewel, the adult punks (Mr. Hamilton was 25 years old and a law student at the time - hardly the antics of a prankish juvenile!) had managed to navigate around the police roadblocks, and eventually had it passed to a senior Glasgow politician who arranged for it to be professionally repaired. Once the London police were informed of its whereabouts, the Stone was returned to Westminster, and Hamilton and the others were threatened with prosecution by the Crown.

But alas, no prosecutions were ever made as thousands of Scots took to the streets to demonstrate in their favour. Also, official predictions were that any court proceedings would eventually require ownership of the Stone to be lawfully asserted and proved - potentially embarrassing the Crown, some were inclined to believe. What bosh. (Yes, yes, and while we're at it, maybe we should consider returning Napoleon's cannons to their rightful owner). Apart from Queen Mary, every monarch since Edward Longshanks has been acclaimed, enthroned and annointed on that Stone, including a line of Stuarts who had no doubt about it's hitherto firmly acquired location and ownership.

(Imagine the Italian Mafia sneaking into the Louvre to "repatriate" the Mona Lisa, and in so carrying out said repatriation, inadvertently tearing a gaping hole in Leonardo Da Vinci's masterpiece as they make their frantic escape.)

The mind boggles at the dark humour and irony of modern justice, a process that repeatedly rewards the culprit over the aggrieved. In a political calculation of monumental stupidity, Michael Forsyth returned the Stone to Edinburgh castle in 1996 (a clearly irritated Duke of York made it quite clear that the Queen was only lending it to Scotland), hoping that this gesture would revive Tory fortunes in Scotland. Forsyth's gesture was in vain and every single Tory lost their seat in the 1997 general election. To add insult to injury, Ian Hamilton was invited to the repatriation ceremony, but refused!

Of course, Labour is just as susceptible to the same silly old game of trying to buy off the nationalist separatist vote to no avail. During the official opening of the newly devolved Scottish Parliament in October 2004, Ian Hamilton was on hand to tell the assembled crowd that "every fibre of my being has been geared towards today and the declaration of a Scottish republic". "Farewell Britannia and advance Scotland." Eat your heart out Tony Blair.

In another era, Ian Hamilton would have lived to the ripe old age of 25, having been either decapitated, drawn and quartered, left to rot in the Tower of London or strung up by his oversized gonads. But this being the 21st century, the popular and otherwise pleasant man of words is having the time of his life as an interesting blogger, watching happily and confidently as his native Scotland creeps ever so deliberately towards full independence:

".. enduring is the thing. Just going on being Scots, and damning the consequences, and damning those in every generation who sell out to go over to the other side. Without bombs, without violence, without hatred, although it is difficult sometimes not to hate the Quislings, we must plod along. The Scottish race was here, under whatever name, long before the English were woad-painted savages. It reached a low ebb in the early twentieth century, but the tide has turned, and the flood now flows.." - Extract from "A Touch of Treason"

"Damning the consequences". Ian Robertson Hamilton, Q.C., wrote the book on damning the consequences. Whether or not he is ultimately rewarded in the process, depends an awful lot on what happens to Destiny.

UPDATE: HE MOCKS US STILL.
The Great Larkster, unrepentent to the end, has visited us in the comments!

Beaverbrook

Read the full article >>