You have a point. A survey by the Morgan Poll in May 2011 showed support for the Australian monarchy was 55% (up 17% since 1999), whereas the support for a republic was at 34% (down 20%). Quite a turnaround ... but then, this was just weeks after a glamourous Royal Wedding had taken place to take the people's minds off their other troubles.

An earlier poll by the Sydney Morning Herald indicated a substantial majority of people think Australia should become a republic, either immediately or upon the Queen's death.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism_in_Australia.

My point, however, is that many politicians in Australia argue for a "resident President" even if they cannot yet rely on sufficient public support. I don't think any one of them seeks the Australian Crown for himself.

(As for Europe, we are in that particular organisation for our own protection against other stronger economic forces in the world, and we'll be in it for as long as the EU exists, which will be much longer than commentators are currently suggesting. We'll just make ourselves a pain in the arse for the others, like we always have been.)

so what you’re saying is this show of solidarity to the Queen and her envoys was a staged side show.
Wouldn't surprise me in the least. Wasn't there a single dissenting Québécois?



Per Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar...g_World_War_II)

The Second World War officially began on September 1, 1939, with the German invasion of Poland. Britain and France declared war on the Nazi Third Reich on September 3, 1939. Seven days later, on September 10, 1939, the Parliament of Canada likewise declared war on Germany, the country's first independent declaration of war ...
...

In 1914, at the outbreak of the First World War, Canada was still a quasi-independent Dominion of the British Empire and automatically went to war when Britain did ... the 1931 Statute of Westminster had transformed Canada into a fully sovereign state ... Despite this, some commentators at the time suggested that Canada was still bound by Britain's declaration of war because it had been made in the name of their common monarch, but Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King was unshakable, and repeatedly declared that "[The Canadian] Parliament will decide".

I doubt very much that it is because of their relationship with America or the UK. I would like to think they have a mind and conscience of their own and it has damn all to do with relationships. I would also like to think that those two countries were as disgusted with this atrocity on the World Trade Centre as the rest of the world was, and it was also done out of respect for the 24 Canadians and the 11 Australians that died in the Twin Towers along with the other 2716 innocent people.
It would be nice to be able to think that. But we are talking about politics and politicians. They respect no-one and nothing can disgust them, nor is there any atrocity that cannot be topped: 3,000 dead in New York - how many dead in Iraq ... how many dead in Afghanistan? Oh .. Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan, so what the fuck were the invading armies in those other countries for? To make sure girls went to school? Right.