discussion for Queen Elizabeth to consider

Britain is once again reckoning with its imperial history during a week in which two ceremonies were held to mark the return of ancient looted artifacts to Nigeria from the UK.


On Wednesday, a college at the University of Cambridge staged a ceremony acknowledging the official return of a bronze statue of a cockerel to Nigeria's National Commission for Museums and Monuments.
The cockerel, donated to the university in 1905 by the father of a student, is a Benin Bronze, looted during the 1897 British invasion of Benin city, in modern Nigeria, during which British forces burnt down the royal palace among other buildings and stole priceless artifacts.
The event at Jesus College was followed by a similar handover at the University of Aberdeen on Thursday evening where a sculpture depicting the head of a Benin king was returned to Nigeria.


Elsewhere in mainland Europe, France and Germany have also taken measures to repatriate similar objects. President Emmanuel Macron was present during an event on Wednesday at the Quai Branly museum in Paris where 26 artifacts were ceremoniously returned to Benin.




These moves have put pressure on a number of academic and cultural institutions such as the British Museum, which is facing calls to return its enormous collection of bronzes, comprised of over 900 artifacts. The museum said in a statement that it "understands and recognizes the significance of the issues surrounding the return of objects" and remains committed to "share our collection as widely as possible."
The issue is an uncomfortable one for the museum, which is also home to other world-famous stolen artifacts, including the Parthenon Marbles, a series of ancients sculptures looted from Athens.
The British government believes that the museum is the right home for the bronzes as it makes them accessible to the largest number of people and, as a leading museum in one of the world's most global cities, has the best facilities for their upkeep.
This is an argument that many find insulting and steeped in exactly the type of British imperial thinking that saw the artifacts looted in the first place.
"This logic suggests that Nigeria is a poorer country that in incapable of properly looking after the artifacts that colonialists stole, despite the fact there is a state-of-the-art museum awaiting them in Nigeria. It's a classic racist argument that Britain is a place of refinement and knows best," said Kehinde Andrews, Professor of Black Studies at Birmingham City University.


Others have argued that because the Kingdom of Benin benefited from the slave trade, modern Nigeria doesn't have the moral high ground to reclaim the artifacts are returned.
Enotie Ogbebor, a Nigerian artist and authority on the bronzes, said that as "many of the artifacts were made long before the slave trade" this is an irrelevant point. "They are part of our culture, they tell a story of our history and they were stolen. It's quite simple."
No matter how much the British government would prefer these artifacts remain in the UK, critics say it's already on the wrong side of history.


A parallel debate over Britain's statues of historical colonialists and slave traders -- sparked by the Black Lives Matter protests that swept the globe following George Floyd's murder -- has forced many in the UK to finally have that difficult conversation about their country's history and the horrors of the British Empire.
Last summer, when protesters pulled down a statue of the 17th-century slave trader Edward Colston and vandalized other statues, including one of Winston Churchill, Boris Johnson fired back, calling the attack on the Churchill statue "absurd and shameful," and his government did everything it could to protect the monuments in the name of heritage -- following up in March with a bill that contained measures that would make defacing statues a criminal act.
On the specific topic of the Benin Bronzes, a government spokesperson told CNN this week that museums operate "independently of the government with decisions relating to collections care and management, including whether to make loans of any objects, taken by the trustees of each institution," pointing out that the bronzes are a private collection rather than a part of the national collection.


This level of buck-passing combined with government policy that firmly backs protecting statues of colonialists in the name of heritage is frustrating for those who believe artifacts like the bronzes should be returned on the basis they were stolen goods.
"There is a new generation who will remember the theater of George Floyd protests and statues being pulled down," said S.I. Martin, author of multiple books on Britain's colonial history and Black British history.
"It seems inconceivable that the conversation will stop at this point or that people will suddenly go back to being 100% comfortable with how these items came to be in Britain. That might force museums to act for the sake of their own relevance," he added.


For now, the British Museum is prohibited from giving its artifacts back by British law, although it is reportedly discussing possible loans to the planned Edo Museum of West African Art in Nigeria.
The decision on whether it does might hand a small symbolic victory to one side in the culture war over Britain's colonial past. The question is, to which side will this institution, which holds so much cultural clout, give its seal of approval as the UK attempts to address its complicated, controversial history in an era of such division and anger.

She’s probably dead.

Who cares fuck her right in pussey.

The Crown Jewels. Stolen fair and square.

once more the lazy bum with a lazy finger wont post a link to the article as a matter of courtesy.

The Crown Jewels. Stolen fair and square.


Originally Posted by VitaMan

sure if u say so.

once more the lazy bum with a lazy finger wont post a link to the article as a matter of courtesy. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

He either boxed himself in with his stupid "don't open any links" BS which would make him a hypocrite if he then posted a link or he simply doesn't know how which I doubt, so we are left with option one.


Even when he admitted he had gotten information from a union news letter that he was presenting as factual, he wouldn't post the link.

What would ElmerFudd do?

Queen Elizabeth is an ugly cow and the UK are a bunch of fgts

The Crown Jewels. Stolen fair and square.


Originally Posted by VitaMan

Wrong. you can't prove your claim. butt you never try anyway so all i have to do is prove your claim false and that's that as they say.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cullin..._to_Edward_VII


Presentation to Edward VII

Transvaal Prime Minister, Louis Botha, suggested buying the diamond for Edward VII as "a token of the loyalty and attachment of the people of the Transvaal to His Majesty's throne and person".[9] In August 1907, a vote was held in the Legislative Council[10] on the Cullinan's fate, and a motion authorising the purchase was carried by 42 votes in favour to 19 against. Initially, Henry Campbell-Bannerman, then British Prime Minister, advised the king to decline the offer, but he later decided to let Edward VII choose whether or not to accept the gift.[11] Eventually, he was persuaded by Winston Churchill, then Colonial Under-Secretary. For his trouble, Churchill was sent a replica, which he enjoyed showing off to guests on a silver plate.[12] The Transvaal Colony government bought the diamond on 17 October 1907 for £150,000,[13] which adjusted for pound-sterling inflation is equivalent to £16 million in 2019.[14] Due to a 60% tax on mining profits, the Treasury received some of its money back from the Premier Diamond Mining Company.[15]



The diamond was presented to the king at Sandringham House by Agent-General of the colony, Sir Richard Solomon, on 9 November 1907 – his sixty-sixth birthday – in the presence of a large party of guests, including the Queen of Sweden, the Queen of Spain, the Duke of Westminster and Lord Revelstoke.[16] The king asked his colonial secretary, Lord Elgin, to announce that he accepted the gift "for myself and my successors" and that he would ensure "this great and unique diamond be kept and preserved among the historic jewels which form the heirlooms of the Crown".[12]





the Cullinan diamond was a PAID FOR GIFT to Edward VII



prove me wrong.

What would ElmerFudd do? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

ignore you


BAHHAHHAAAAA

[QUOTE=HedonistForever;10626419 31
Even when he admitted he had gotten information from a union news letter that he was presenting as factual, he wouldn't post the link.[/QUOTE]


That's a flat out lie bud.


You didn't read the original thread correctly. You concocted some story about a union news letter. Several links are posted on that thread. You state I admitted I got the information from a union news letter.



How many mistakes can you make in 1 post ?

Wrong. you can't prove your claim. butt you never try anyway so all i have to do is prove your claim false and that's that as they say.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cullin..._to_Edward_VII


Presentation to Edward VII

Transvaal Prime Minister, Louis Botha, suggested buying the diamond for Edward VII as "a token of the loyalty and attachment of the people of the Transvaal to His Majesty's throne and person".[9] In August 1907, a vote was held in the Legislative Council[10] on the Cullinan's fate, and a motion authorising the purchase was carried by 42 votes in favour to 19 against. Initially, Henry Campbell-Bannerman, then British Prime Minister, advised the king to decline the offer, but he later decided to let Edward VII choose whether or not to accept the gift.[11] Eventually, he was persuaded by Winston Churchill, then Colonial Under-Secretary. For his trouble, Churchill was sent a replica, which he enjoyed showing off to guests on a silver plate.[12] The Transvaal Colony government bought the diamond on 17 October 1907 for £150,000,[13] which adjusted for pound-sterling inflation is equivalent to £16 million in 2019.[14] Due to a 60% tax on mining profits, the Treasury received some of its money back from the Premier Diamond Mining Company.[15]



The diamond was presented to the king at Sandringham House by Agent-General of the colony, Sir Richard Solomon, on 9 November 1907 – his sixty-sixth birthday – in the presence of a large party of guests, including the Queen of Sweden, the Queen of Spain, the Duke of Westminster and Lord Revelstoke.[16] The king asked his colonial secretary, Lord Elgin, to announce that he accepted the gift "for myself and my successors" and that he would ensure "this great and unique diamond be kept and preserved among the historic jewels which form the heirlooms of the Crown".[12]





the Cullinan diamond was a PAID FOR GIFT to Edward VII



prove me wrong. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

The Cullinan was nothing but a large clump of crystalline carbon when found.

It took thousands of hours of meticulous cleaving, bruting, cutting and polishing to create the various priceless gems they are.

As for the Nigerian Slave Trade, I think the UN should commission a study into the culpability of Western Sub Saharan Tribes in the slave trade.,

That's a flat out lie bud. Originally Posted by VitaMan

then post the link as your source. otherwise HF's opinion becomes fact. because it is.

The Cullinan was nothing but a large clump of crystalline carbon when found.

It took thousands of hours of meticulous cleaving, bruting, cutting and polishing to create the various priceless gems they are.

As for the Nigerian Slave Trade, I think the UN should commission a study into the culpability of Western Sub Saharan Tribes in the slave trade., Originally Posted by Jackie S

you know that will never happen, jackie. the U.N. is too "woke" for the truth. the truth must never be told by the "woke mob" .. because the truth exposes what they really are.

I don't know about the queen

but camilla parker bowles

cant stop talking about joe bidens long fart at the climate conference