Video surfaces of young QEII performing Nazi salute

[mbcdefg]

Queen's Nazi salute footage raises pressure on royals to open archives



Palace aides launch inquiry into leak of home movie amid calls from MPs and historians to release material from private archive


www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/19/queens-nazi-salute-video-pressure-mounts-on-royals-to-open-up-archives 




Buckingham Palace has refused to be drawn into the debate over the royal family’s private archives amid mounting pressure to release historical documents following the publication of a video showing the Queen performing a Nazi salute in the 1930s.



As palace aides launched an inquiry on Sunday into the leak of the 17-second home movie, the royal family refused to bow to calls from MPs and leading historians to open up the British monarchy’s official archives held at Windsor Castle.



Respected historians said that releasing some of the material, which stretches back over 250 years, would add to the country’s knowledge of the Queen and provide important historical context to the links between some leading royals and the Third Reich before the second world war.



Mark Almond, professor of modern history at Oxford University, said: “Opening up aspects of the Queen’s early years is not going to damage respect for the monarchy. It can only reinforce her standing with the public.



“This film reminds us of how many challenges this country has overcome in the last eight decades under the Windsors.”



The black-and-white footage is believed to have been filmed by the Queen’s father, the future King George VI, on the family’s Balmoral estate in Scotland in 1933 or 1934. It shows the future Queen – then aged six or seven – raising her right hand in the air as the Queen Mother does the same. The group were apparently being encouraged by the future King Edward VIII.



The 89-year-old monarch appeared briefly in public on Sunday morning as she made her way by car from Windsor Castle to a nearby church.



Meanwhile, royal aides sought to downplay the film’s publication, stressing that the palace was conducting “enquiries”, not a full-blown investigation, and that it was “business as usual” for the household. There were no plans to cancel any of the Queen’s future engagements in the wake of the disclosure, they said.



Late on Sunday, it was reported by the Daily Telegraph that the footage may have been inadvertently handed over by Buckingham Palace to documentary makers who were putting together an exhibition called Royal Childhood.



Dr Karina Urbach, of the Institute of Historical Research, who was approached about viewing the film 11 days ago, said the royal family were suppressing their own history in a form of censorship that had no place in modern Britain. “This is information that should have been in the public domain 50 years ago,” she said. “The royal archives contain matters of state. The role of the monarch is not a purely personal matter. We no longer have the divine right of kings.”



Ingrid Seward, a royal biographer and editor-in-chief of Majesty magazine, added: “The Queen becomes Britain’s longest-reigning monarch in September and any new information about her, however distant it might be, is of enormous interest. Archive images add to our knowledge of her. It would be great to see more.”



However, Buckingham Palace said it was disappointed that the film was “exploited” by the Sun and was investigating how it was leaked to the newspaper. Depending on the outcome of the investigation, palace lawyers will look at issues of copyright and possible criminality.



“There may be an issue of copyright and there may be an issue of criminality,” said a royal source, who said it had yet to be determined whether the police would be called in to investigate. Royal aides said it was too early to decide whether a complaint would be made to the press regulator, the Independent Press Standards Organisation.



Archivists at the the British Film Institute are looking into whether the footage was held at its £12m cold-storage facility at Gaydon in Warwickshire or came from the Queen’s personal archive at Windsor Castle.



The inquiry will also seek to establish whether the footage was kept at the Paris villa of the Duchess of Windsor, the American divorcee who became the Queen’s aunt by marriage after Edward abdicated.



The contents of the duchess’s Bois de Boulogne home were bought by Mohamed Al Fayed, the former owner of Harrods, after she died in 1986, and later auctioned at Sotheby’s in February 1998.



Their 44,000 possessions – including the duke and duchess’s wedding cake, which sold for just under $30,000 – were later billed by the auction house as “perhaps the greatest treasure house of royal possessions offered at auction”. The collection raised more than £14m for charities supported by Diana, Princess of Wales and Fayed’s son Dodi, who were killed in a Paris car crash in August 1997.


(Note: A 17-second film showing the Queen performing a Nazi salute in 1933 was not among the royal memorabilia sold at auction by Mohamed Al Fayed, a spokesman for the former Harrods owner has said.
 Michael Cole, Fayed’s long-term confidant, said there was no cine film among the items sold at auction in 1998 – meaning the leak almost certainly came from the Queen’s private archive at Windsor Castle.
 www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/20/mohamed-al-fayed-not-linked-queen-nazi-salute-film-confidant)  


The culture secretary, John Whittingdale, on Sunday backed the Sun’s decision to publish the eight-decade-old footage, but said he understood why the palace was upset by its use. “It is an editorial judgment. It is up to the press to decide what is and what is not appropriate to print,” he told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show.



“They decided clearly there was a public interest and the British public will judge whether or not they were right. Sometimes editors have difficult decisions. Sometimes people will think they are right, sometimes wrong. We have an independent press regulator which is available. But I can understand, in this particular instance, why the palace were upset by it.”



While several newspapers in Britain backed the Sun’s decision to publish the footage, the German newspaper Bild attacked the redtop in a scathing commentary.



The paper said the Sun and its owner, 84-year-old Rupert Murdoch, published the story just to shock readers. “It would be clear to even the most serious of Windsor despisers that a little girl would do what her uncle told her,” wrote the newspaper, referring to Prince Edward (later King Edward VIII), who allegedly taught his niece the salute.



The Sun’s decision was less to do with “outrage”, and more to do with the “lightning victory” that Hitler leads to at newspaper kiosks, said Bild. Citing the German weekly magazine Spiegel, Bild wrote that German, as well as British, tabloid and broadsheet publications were also guilty of publishing such stories.



However, it added: “It seems hard for the British to understand that we ‘Krauts’ don’t really find Hitler so funny. And so it’s clearly said here: the man is the biggest mass murderer in history. In contrast, the British find it ‘funny’ if Prince Harry turns up at a party with a Nazi armband.”

[msmerymac]

I heard about this last week.

I'm not saying Hitler doesn't represent all evil, and that people don't have a visceral reaction to the Nazi salute, but seriously. The Queen was SEVEN. In 1933.

[2curlydogs]

Please to be seeing photos of US children saluting the flag in the 1930s and then come back to me with your outrage.....

ETA: general "your"

[pixy0stix]

I'm fascinated by the politics of this.

[lg28]

Yeah, I don't see the outrage, she was a kid.

[darthnbjenni]

Jul 20, 2015 15:59:33 GMT -5 2curlydogs said:

Please to be seeing photos of US children saluting the flag in the 1930s and then come back to me with your outrage.....

ETA: general "your"

Yep - with the Bellamy salute

[hopecounts]

this is much ado abut nothing. to me,first it was 1933 hitler was just coming to power basically NO ONE took him seriously, second she was being shown how to do it by Edward VIII his leanings are not exactly new information, third more then a few upperclass Brits were intrigued by Fascism at this time they mostly came to their senses and QEII served in the auxillary service as soon as she was old enough to so whatever thoughts she had at 7 clearly she wised up.

[cville]

Jul 20, 2015 15:56:45 GMT -5 msmerymac said:

I heard about this last week.

I'm not saying Hitler doesn't represent all evil, and that people don't have a visceral reaction to the Nazi salute, but seriously. The Queen was SEVEN. In 1933.

This makes me think her father ain't shit, but she was a child. She also did quite a bit during the war that I think would demonstrate anti-Nazi feelings. Like supporting active armed resistance.

Now, you want to talk interrelations between different royal/political families throughout Europe and like 90% of them looking the other way while Hitler gained power? THAT is fascinating.

[msmerymac]

Jul 20, 2015 16:09:00 GMT -5 cville said:

Jul 20, 2015 15:56:45 GMT -5 msmerymac said:

I heard about this last week.

I'm not saying Hitler doesn't represent all evil, and that people don't have a visceral reaction to the Nazi salute, but seriously. The Queen was SEVEN. In 1933.

This makes me think her father ain't shit, but she was a child. She also did quite a bit during the war that I think would demonstrate anti-Nazi feelings. Like supporting active armed resistance.

Now, you want to talk interrelations between different royal/political families throughout Europe and like 90% of them looking the other way while Hitler gained power? THAT is fascinating.

Hell, probably all of Prince Philip's sisters had Nazi leanings. I think his youngest sister, who was killed in a plane crash in 1937, was a legitimate member of the Nazi party. 

[hopecounts]

Jul 20, 2015 16:09:00 GMT -5 cville said:

Jul 20, 2015 15:56:45 GMT -5 msmerymac said:

I heard about this last week.

I'm not saying Hitler doesn't represent all evil, and that people don't have a visceral reaction to the Nazi salute, but seriously. The Queen was SEVEN. In 1933.

This makes me think her father ain't shit, but she was a child. She also did quite a bit during the war that I think would demonstrate anti-Nazi feelings. Like supporting active armed resistance.

Now, you want to talk interrelations between different royal/political families throughout Europe and like 90% of them looking the other way while Hitler gained power? THAT is fascinating.

well it was her uncle teaching her and he was a known Nazi sympathizer (see his visit to Germany post abdication) but her Dad was likely the one filming and the Queen Mum is with her on screen.
Her parents did a lot during the war and supported it this was just before Hitler was known to be a threat.
also there is a good bit to say about the desire of those who survived WWI to avoid war at almost any cost.
George VI was in the battle of Jutland and the Queen Mum lost a brother in the war they wanted Hitler to be harmless theres a reason appeasment was extremely popular until Hitler took that step to far into Poland.

[hopecounts]

Jul 20, 2015 16:12:08 GMT -5 msmerymac said:

Jul 20, 2015 16:09:00 GMT -5 cville said:

This makes me think her father ain't shit, but she was a child. She also did quite a bit during the war that I think would demonstrate anti-Nazi feelings. Like supporting active armed resistance.

Now, you want to talk interrelations between different royal/political families throughout Europe and like 90% of them looking the other way while Hitler gained power? THAT is fascinating.

Hell, probably all of Prince Philip's sisters had Nazi leanings. I think his youngest sister, who was killed in a plane crash in 1937, was a legitimate member of the Nazi party. 

his siters were married to Nazi memebrs which is why none of them were invited to the wedding.

[cville]

Jul 20, 2015 16:17:45 GMT -5 hopecounts said:

Jul 20, 2015 16:09:00 GMT -5 cville said:

This makes me think her father ain't shit, but she was a child. She also did quite a bit during the war that I think would demonstrate anti-Nazi feelings. Like supporting active armed resistance.

Now, you want to talk interrelations between different royal/political families throughout Europe and like 90% of them looking the other way while Hitler gained power? THAT is fascinating.

well it was her uncle teaching her and he was a known Nazi sympathizer (see his visit to Germany post abdication) but her Dad was likely the one filming and the Queen Mum is with her on screen.
Her parents did a lot during the war and supported it this was just before Hitler was known to be a threat.
also there is a good bit to say about the desire of those who survived WWI to avoid war at almost any cost.
George VI was in the battle of Jutland and the Queen Mum lost a brother in the war they wanted Hitler to be harmless theres a reason appeasment was extremely popular until Hitler took that step to far into Poland.

That's certainly one perspective.

[hopecounts]

Jul 20, 2015 16:23:40 GMT -5 cville said:

Jul 20, 2015 16:17:45 GMT -5 hopecounts said:

well it was her uncle teaching her and he was a known Nazi sympathizer (see his visit to Germany post abdication) but her Dad was likely the one filming and the Queen Mum is with her on screen.
Her parents did a lot during the war and supported it this was just before Hitler was known to be a threat.
also there is a good bit to say about the desire of those who survived WWI to avoid war at almost any cost.
George VI was in the battle of Jutland and the Queen Mum lost a brother in the war they wanted Hitler to be harmless theres a reason appeasment was extremely popular until Hitler took that step to far into Poland.

That's certainly one perspective.

If it wasn't clear I don't disagree they looked the other way I just think their motivation for doing so is complicated.
Most of the royals and politicals during his rise are the men who came through the trenches and watched a generation of men die in them.
That kind of stuff screws you up.
It's the same stuff US politicians were saying it just wasn't in our backyard so less immediate.
Now there were absolutely cases where certain people didn't disagree with him like I pointed out with Edward VIII (some people think the real reason he was forced to abdicate rather then being allowed a morganic marriage is they didn't want a Nazi Sympathizer on the throne and Wallis was a convenient line in the sand).
There were those who didn't see fascism as a threat (or saw communism as the bigger threat) and there were those who couldn't stomach the idea of another war and those who were a little bit of both.

[cville]

I am familiar with the exigencies and conflicts of the interwar period. Dude.

[hopecounts]

Jul 20, 2015 17:31:41 GMT -5 cville said:

I am familiar with the exigencies and conflicts of the interwar period. Dude.

Just making conversation
It's an interesting topic to discuss.