Posted on 01/13/2008 3:16:02 PM PST by naturalman1975
LONDON: A plot by al-Qa'ida operatives to kill the Queen during a state visit to Uganda less than two months ago was foiled by security services.
The terrorists had planned to hide inside two broadcast vans owned by the Ugandan Broadcasting Corporation and then set off bombs during the Queen's visit to Kampala last November.
London's Sunday Express reported the vans were seized after a tip-off from intelligence agents.
As a result, the broadcaster was unable to transmit live pictures of key summit events, including the Queen's historic address to the Ugandan parliament on November 22.
The Queen, Prince Philip, Prince Charles and his wife Camilla travelled to the east African nation's capital for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, attended by more than 30 world leaders. Australia was represented by Richard Alston, the High Commissioner to London.
Uganda's Internal Affairs Minister Ruhakana Rugunda said several suspected terrorists were arrested.
"We received information that a terrorist group linked to al-Qa'ida, the Allied Democratic Forces, was planning to carry out terrorist activities at the Commonwealth meeting," he told the Sunday Express.
"The security services in Uganda neutralised these threats."
Dr Rugunda refused to comment on the exact nature of the intended attacks or reports that Ugandan armed forces had seized a speedboat loaded with arms and homemade bombs.
A number of suspected ADF guerillas aboard the boat on Lake Victoria are believed to have been taken into custody, the Sunday Express reported.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.news.com.au ...
According to legend, Edward, the Black Prince, Prince of Wales at that time, took the crest and motto of King John I of Bohemia as his own, after the Battle of Crecy (in which Edward fought, and John was killed). Edward was very impressed with the courage John displayed in that battle - John was blind and still chose to ride forward into battle as a King should.
Don’t you think just the threat of assassination would rile them up? I’d think so.
While I certainly don’t wish her dead , I have no use for her or her kin . The whole Royal Family scam is a grovel operation . Put her and Philip in a semi-detached in Bounds Green on a middle class income and let them prove themselves in a television drama . A couple who could create a twit like Bonny Prince Charlie ain’t quite up to snuff doncha know old chap .
She looks just like Carol Burnett! ;0)
Thanks. And now I realize that I managed to conjugate the verb wrong. Ich dien, du dienst, etc. That explains why when I checked it with google earlier I came up blank. But, as you say, Ich dien points to the Prince of Wales.
She probably thinks the same about you - except she is too polite to say so.
They said it was a bomb, not a bim.
I tend to agree with you about Charles. But I admire the queen.
I’m certainly glad that we don’t have royalty in America, but the English have done pretty well with it, and I admire her for accepting the life she was given and doing a very good job of it. It’s a lot of hard, long, tedious work.
Can’t help but recall right after the Windsor Castle ( uninsured ) fire , with the country deep in recession , the Conservative Party and other “ officials “ calling for the taxpayers to pay for the repairs ! She’s only worth half a billion , and doesn’t pay taxes herself , but from what I gather she didn’t pay one bloody pence out of her own pocket . She magnanimously opened Buckingham Palace to tourists instead . “ Those tourists are money ! ( Sex Pistols ) indeed .
“The tragic fire at Windsor Castle highlights the ambiguity or sheer inconsistency of the relationship between the monarchy and the taxpayer,” said Alan Williams, a Labor Party member of Parliament. “The suggestion that the taxpayer might foot the bill raises the question of why the Queen, in her private capacity, should not be a taxpayer also.”
As somebody who has known the Prince of Wales for more than forty years, and known him well for a shorter period of time, I have to say that the way he is often presented in the media has little to do with reality.
He is a fairly intelligent, fairly well educated, and utterly dedicated man, with a genuine desire to do what is right. I don’t think he’s always succeeded, but he has tried.
He does have some eccentricities - but that doesn’t surprise me, given his role in life has been to spend 60 years waiting for his mother to die, so he can do his duty.
England would have awakened had this happened....to
the fact that there is a bit of a threat to civilization in their midst.
Aaah, yes, yes.
Windsor Castle is not owned by the Queen but is part of the royal estate which belongs to the government of the United Kingdom and has since the time of George III. (Of the royal residences, only Balmoral, and Sandringham, actually belong to the Queen as property). The crown estate is worth about £7,000,000,000 at present and every penny of income it generates goes directly into the British treasury, not to the Monarch.
This is the reason why it was expected that the British government would pay for any repairs to Windsor Castle, rather than the Queen - because they own it, and she does not.
She isn’t a cousin of mine, either. But we are the same age.
And I say to her, “Keep Going, Queen”.
I knew that she didn’t own Windsor , but felt that since she is the one who enjoys it , and possesses half a billion dollars to boot , that she should have at least contributed some money to the repairs , rather than expecting her already overtaxed British subjects shell out the dough .
Not Hanoverian. It goes back to Plantagenet times. It’s the motto of the Prince of Wales.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_of_Wales%27s_feathers
There’s a number of problems with that suggestion, not least of which is the fact that it would have violated constitutional convention - when the Queen acceded to the throne, she ceded authority over Windsor Castle, as every monarch since George III has done.
If she had paid for the repairs out of her private holdings, she would have been resuming authority over an aspect of the Crown Estate - something she actually does, theoretically, have the power to do, but which would be a violation of constitutional convention.
The plan eventually worked out where repairs would be funded (at no additional expense to the British taxpayer over what was already spent on the Castle’s maintenance) but opening the Castle and Buckingham Palace to visitors, did not violate constitutional convention, because it involved moneys raised from the Crown Estate being spent on the Crown Estate.
Please understand that I am something of an expert on matters of protocol relating to the Royal Family. It was part of my job while I was in the Navy. Most people don’t need to understand these things as well as I did, so I’m not surprised there’s a lot of erroneous ideas out there about what was actually happening. It’s just a pity they get spread by the media.
But in essence, the Queen could not dip into her own money to pay for repairs to Windsor without creating a constitutional crisis - admittedly a fairly small one, but we’d rather avoid even small constitutional crises.
And it can work the other way - when the Queen’s father acceded to the throne following the abdication of his brother, he was compelled to pay out of his own pocket to purchase both Sandringham and Balmoral, because they weren’t part of the Crown Estate, but he was obliged to maintain them as Royal Residences.
I believe they arrested Papshmir.......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.