Questions for our British friends

[Greenman]

One of the worst insults for black people in this country was nignog although I am not sure where that originated-it was most prominent once in a British 70s comedy sitcom series called 'Love Thy Neighbour'-where the neighbour Eddie Booth(Jack Smethurst) used it to describe black people as well as 'sambo' and his black neighbour Bill Reynolds (Rudolph Walker)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Thy_Neighbour

[Greenman]

http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2...ing-of-nignog/
Just one person who has looked into this.

[MrInBetween]

Originally Posted by seany65

About the 'correct' pronunciation of 'Chalmondley' being 'chumley'. Again, crap. Probably. If 'Chalmondeley' is from old or middle english, then all the letters would be pronounced. This 'chumley' crap was invented by boring people with the name, who tried to sound more interesting.

If it were true that we had to pronounce all the letters in any word from Middle English, we'd all be saying k-n-ee-ckh-t instead of n-ai-t for 'knight'.

There's a place in Cheshire called Cholmondeley, recorded in the Doomsday Book as Calmundelei, which is a Saxon - and so pre-Conquest - name. Perhaps 'Chumley' was the result of Normans trying to get their tongues round it.

Let's not forget the story about Horatio Bottomley, the MP, newspaper baron and crook. He went to pay a call on Lord Cholmondeley, and said to the butler who answered the door, 'Please can you tell Lord Cholmondeley that Horatio Bottomley is here to see him' - pronouncing the name the long way. The butler said, 'Actually, sir, my Lordship's name is pronounced 'Chumley'.' Horatio Bottomley replied, 'In that case, can you tell Lord Chumley that Horatio Bumley is here to see him.'

[Helenic]

If going to Bovington for the tanks, a small detour to Stonehenge is worthwhile - it is several thousand years BC and these things are only found in England, not Europe.

If going to the War Rooms in Whitehall, don't miss the Admiralty charts on the rear wall; the pin-holes from marking the convoy ships make a swathe that clearly shoes the routes, and these are the real rooms, real maps, real holes etc.

Moored on the Thames is HMS Belfast, a Battleship (or maybe Cruiser) that fired at D-Day beaches, and you can walk around her.

If you go to Portsmouth, there is a terrible D-Day museum - don't bother. But it is an old dockyard, dating back to before Henry VIII (so 1500s). Southsea Castle was built by Henry to guard the approach, and it looks nothing like a 16th Century castle - because it was the first to be designed to survive artillery. It looks almost exactly like the forts of the Maginot line in France, built in the 1930s. These days Portsmouth is a sad place, so you probably won't go.

If you do some research first, you can find the remains of the 'stop line' we built in 1940 in case of German invasion: it is a continuous line of anti-tank obstacles, pill-boxes etc that runs from North of London, down the East side, around the South of London, and off into Wales. There are still pill-boxes all over the South of England, especially on the canals.

Dover - where the D-Day invasion was planned and managed - has miles of tunnels built into the cliffs, connecting with the old castle, and there are war rooms, guns etc around Dover. It is also a short ferry ride to France (or you can go to Folkestone, a few miles away , and take the Channel Tunnel over - faster, about the same price usually). Once over, drive down the coast and you cannot help but fall over British WW2 tanks left as memorials, war graves and so on - from WW1 and 2, from Dunkirk in 1940 and from 1944. Some of the tanks are the 'funnies' - the special-purpose ones for particular tasks, such as the one that fired short-range bunker-buster projectiles (the gun looks like a dustbin on end), or the ones with flails for mines etc. You just drive by these things.

The thing about Britain is that it is quite small, and almost everywhere you go (if you know where to look) you will find military bases, old and new, Cold War Civil Defence stations and all the rest. No-where is more than about 25 miles from a major strategic target (hence our attitude to Civil Defence in the 1980s, which was that we were dead if it went Nuclear and hence the British Army on the Rhine (expected survival time in 1980s was 3 days, and that was optomistic).

If you like these things, don't rush. The IWM is a big place on it's own (can't miss it - two 15" naval guns outside). Greenwich is Naval too, but the old Admiralty buildings are now the University and there is little to see there. RAF Duxford is worth a trip.

But if you like the WW2 stuff, I think maybe I would also go to the big War cemetaries in France; go to the largest and just look at the numbers and what they fought for. It does bring home the futility of that slaughter (by which I mean the futility of imagining that killing stops wars - we had to fight and that was right, but we'll have to do it again someday too).

It is also worth checking out Churchills 7-volume set on WW2. It includes telegrams and so on, and tables of output and casualties. It is not often realised that UK has more soldiers in contact with the enemy than anyone else until 1945. Shock.

Don't be tempted to go to Aldershot (home of the British Army). Nothing there but some bad pubs.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by Helenic

It is not often realised that UK has more soldiers in contact with the enemy than anyone else until 1945

mmm... didn't USSR have a few troops in contact with the enemy? Like millions and millions for years and years

It's possible UK had more in contact than USA

[knobby109]

Originally Posted by Dumbassgo

The Queen took the throne in 1952 upon the death of King George VI (her father). He had no sons so she became monarch as oldest child. Prince Phillip is not the head of the monarchy, he is the Queen's consort as he only married into royalty.

Same applied to the Queen Mother - she was a royal consort and therefore couldn't become Queen upon the death of her husband.

Prince Charles is next in line should Queen Elizabeth II die/abdicate.

It's called the line of succession.

I'm not a royalist. I'd be happier if they all buggered off. They can stay there as tourist attractions but I'm not happy paying for them through the tax system. Most of them aren't worth a pinch of shit.

Cheers,
Dumbassgo.

The Royal Family and in particular the Queen don't take a penny piece from the taxpayer.On her accession to the throne, Her Majesty exchanged the income from her Crown Estates for an annual payment called the Civil List.As she gave the government about twice the amount paid back she is actually subsidising the taxpayer.
Of course most of the Civil List is spent on staff wages and upkeep.It's not pocket money.
We are of course freed from the curse of having to be represented on ceremonial occasions by a grubby politician.The monarch can do things abroad and be accepted where our politicos would falter. What she did in Ireland couldn't have been achieved by anyone else.
Then of course there's the effect she has on tourist income and on trade when she visits abroad.She is a valuable economic asset to the nation.

[richardoe]

I dont think any reigning monarch receives a salary.

[spazarino]

Originally Posted by Dumbassgo

The Queen took the throne in 1952 upon the death of King George VI (her father). He had no sons so she became monarch as oldest child. Prince Phillip is not the head of the monarchy, he is the Queen's consort as he only married into royalty.

Actually, Prince Phillip was already royalty when he married Elizabeth (prior to her taking the throne, and he having been born into Greek and Danish royalty).

Being a great-grandson of Queen Victoria, he IS in the line of succession...but he's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayy down the line and wouldn't have a chance even if he was Prince George's age.

[GailFan]

Just been trying to watch the sci-if alien invasion movie "Attack the Block", but gave up in disgust as the film revels in British thug culture (or "fug" as these illiterate half-wits would pronounce it).

How on earth do you lot tolerate not just the gangs but the idolisation of them???

[Greenman]

I've not seen the film but it is mostly a parody of the gang culture and the way they talk and clothing etc. I suppose we tolerate it because it is pretty stupid to us older chaps, because we didn't act like prats when we were their age-well I didn't anyway and the machismo thing is probably down to watching too many American yoof movies
Most so-called gangs are parodies of American gang culture-something else we could have done without importing, but then young people here have always been influenced by America and the Internet & Youtube make it ten times worse. We've always had gangs going back to the Mods & Rockers of the 70s meeting up for a fight on a Bank Holiday weekend in Brighton and then Punks of course. Ever seen a British film called 'Quadrophenia'? If not and you get a chance to watch it you will see what I mean. Attack the Block is really meant to be a science-fiction parody but also the likelihood of a gang taking on aliens is very far-fetched.