This letter arrived for me over a week ago. As you can see, the stamp, wavy line cancellation, date stamp and EIIR insignia are all red. On the reverse of the envelope, was simply the Queen’s crest (below), also in red. The new first class stamps are red, I believe, although since my business has moved to PPI labels (which have a big “1” or “2” on them), I haven’t bought any stamps for over a year.
It hasn’t always been like this, but I am drawing your attention to all this redness because of an event from a long time ago, which very few people know about and the episode may not even be recorded anywhere. I took the chance that it hasn’t been written about before and added “World Exclusive” to this post! Ordinary bloggers can quote for free; mainstream outlets can discuss extortionate rates for extra information via my agent: me.
When in my twenties, I worked for two firms of stamp dealers and one of them had been offered a quantity of the 1973 EEC stamp – the 3p value – but with the jigsaw in red rather than orange. They would have been worth a lot of money had they made it onto the market.
I do not know if it is still the case, but in those days, the Monarch had to approve each new stamp issue. Only fair, I suppose, as they all have her mush on them. The story from the person who tried selling these stamps with the red jigsaw was that the Queen rejected them as the EEC might be seen as another communist bloc, so the colour must be changed. Maybe, like Prime Minister of the time, Ted Heath, she realised that it was far too early to make the overall plan too obvious.
The 1970s was a good time to buy stamps for investment. But if you didn’t get out the market by 1978, you could kiss those investments goodbye, as the prices tumbled rapidly, so that stamps which had been worth many times their face value were being sold at below face to be used as normal postage.
My boss, keen to do the right thing, and also not risk being done for receiving stolen goods, did some checking and discovered that these stamps should not have been removed by any employee. Although, a subsequent dealing many years later showed that a different ‘security’ printer used by the Royal Mail didn’t bother too much about that sort of thing in the 70s and allowed staff to take errors home on occasion – until one tried selling them, then another employee was overheard in court being ordered to tell any lie necessary to get the things back.
But, I digress. You want to know what is in the letter. So do I. I still haven’t opened it, because it is the reply to my plea to Her Majesty’s Private Secretary to ask her not to give her Royal Assent to the Same Sex “Marriage” Bill, which she did, probably before my letter had been opened. I had explained that signing would be breaking her Coronation Oath and that the homosexual agenda is being driven to subvert our culture.
I quoted Yuri Bezmenov, the KGB defector, who admitted they used to promote “equality” in the West because it creates a society which is built on sand and will collapse to be taken over.
Any guesses what the letter will say?
I have just read it, so now I know. Is it protocol to tell? The letter was signed by the Deputy Correspondence Co-ordinator, whose three paragraphs were quite interesting. Apparently, “Careful note has been taken” of my views on SSM. Why? For passing to MI5, perhaps?
It was explained that, “There is no question of The Queen, as a constitutional Sovereign, refusing the Royal Assent to an Act which has been passed by both Houses of Parliament.”
Is this correct? If so, why continue with the charade?
Finally, I was thrilled to learn that, “Nevertheless, Her Majesty was interested to know of your feelings on the matter.”