[Closed] How Many Armies does the Queen have?

Here is an example of a polarized perspective

So why do you think I have two opposing opinions at the same time then ?

What have I said to suggest that.

Good trolling, but even you're not that dumb

Eh ?

That's what you said

That I had a polarised perspective.

What do you think that means.

I know what it means... what do you think it means?

Prime Minister of Her Majesty's Government 'asks' Queen to dissolve Parliament:

No polarized perspectives please people, let's see the whole picture

For starters, go away and read the [url= http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/contents/enacted ]Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011[/url].

Or don't, I don't care.

This is the UK parliament, passing a law that says that the Queen does not have the authority to dissolve Parliament on the request of the Prime Minister except under the rules set down in the legislation. That Parliament can tell the Queen that she cannot dissolve it makes sense if you think (as everyone else has done for quite a while) that Parliament is sovereign.

it makes sense if you think

Seems unlikely that this will happen. I admire your hope though!

Or rather parliament acting within the bounds of its authority as granted to it by the Monarch. The UK is a constitutional monarchy not a democratic republic; therin lies the devil in the detail.

The Queen has dissolved Parliament ??? Well when Charles I dissolved Parliament in 1629 it eventually resulted in his execution.

I think we can now expect a protracted civil war, I'm backing Parliamentarians - anyone going to support the Royalists ?

And what say all the disbelievers on here who dismissed JHJ as some sort of cranky conspiracy theorist in light of this chilling new development, eh ?

The detail being parliament has killed one king for being naughty and replaced a few others . The Fixed Term Parliaments Act is pretty compelling as to where power lies as Liz cannot dissolve parliament at will.

So who runs the country when parliament is dissolved?

On whose behalf?

1:The Queen in the person of the civil service and the other non-parliamentary organs of state. That's the point. She doesn't make any executive decisions
2: on behalf of the population.

Pfft details details details

1. Not making any executive decisions in public, yet having private meetings with the Prime Minister and Privy Council and an extensive legislature removing you from any responsibility would be a pretty good way of running things without getting your hands dirty...

2. Does that mean that MI5 running paedophile rings is on behalf of the population? Or 10 year legal battles attempting to prevent publication of letters between Prince Charles and Ministers?

Nice to now someone is looking out for us...

Jeez - not denying the seriousness of some of the real issues you like to address, but with your level of paranoia, you really should seek treatment.

Just saying like, as a member of the civil service who apparently have to do the Queens evil bidding. Can't wait to hear what you make of it if you discover that the entire civil service has been put into a state of "purdah" pending the general election.....

I think we can now expect a protracted civil war, I'm backing Parliamentarians - anyone going to support the Royalists

Easy does it... I may dramatize my views somewhat, but I'd like to re-iterate, I don't believe the Queen has total control over every element of the UK or any of the other countries in which she is head of state or the armies over which she has authority.

However, when such questionable practices as global surveillance, or cover up of VIP paedophile rings, said to include members of the Royal Family have gone on over multiple governments with different Prime Ministers and political parties, it doesn't seem that outlandish to at least question on whose behalf such matters have been carried out.

However, when such questionable practices as global surveillance, or cover up of VIP paedophile rings, said to include members of the Royal Family have gone on over multiple governments with different Prime Ministers and political parties, it doesn't seem that outlandish to at least question on whose behalf such matters have been carried out.

I don't believe the Queen has total control over every element of the UK or any of the other countries in which she is head of state or the armies over which she has authority.

So......

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Blimey, this thread is getting things done!!

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Whoah there, steady on mike, at this rate you'll be saying the [url= http://www.threeworldwars.com/albert-pike2.htm ]Albert Pike letter[/url] may not be a hoax after all:

"The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Czars in Russia and of making that country a fortress of atheistic Communism. The divergences caused by the "agentur" (agents) of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic Empires will be used to foment this war. At the end of the war, Communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments and in order to weaken the religions." 2

Students of history will recognize that the political alliances of England on one side and Germany on the other, forged between 1871 and 1898 by Otto von Bismarck, co-conspirator of Albert Pike, were instrumental in bringing about the First World War.

"The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine. During the Second World War, International Communism must become strong enough in order to balance Christendom, which would be then restrained and held in check until the time when we would need it for the final social cataclysm." 3

After this Second World War, Communism was made strong enough to begin taking over weaker governments. In 1945, at the Potsdam Conference between Truman, Churchill, and Stalin, a large portion of Europe was simply handed over to Russia, and on the other side of the world, the aftermath of the war with Japan helped to sweep the tide of Communism into China.

(Readers who argue that the terms Nazism and Zionism were not known in 1871 should remember that the Illuminati invented both these movements. In addition, Communism as an ideology, and as a coined phrase, originates in France during the Revolution. In 1785, Restif coined the phrase four years before revolution broke out. Restif and Babeuf, in turn, were influenced by Rousseau - as was the most famous conspirator of them all, Adam Weishaupt.)

But that would be silly, after all, it's not as if this has any semblance to current world events:

The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…

bloody conspiracy loons!!

no just that posting photo's is not exactly a serious way of communicating your ideas. Try some actual proof or facts, oh hang on we have been trying that from page 1 and still nothing.
[img] http://s4.firstpost.in/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/RTROM33.jp g" target="_blank">http://s4.firstpost.in/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/RTROM33.jp g"/> [/img]
[img] [/img]
We all now what that means don't we

Are you disputing:

that the Queen is head of state of 4 of the 5 eyes surveillance alliance countries?

Or that she has ultimate authority (albeit not absolute power) over several armies and intelligence services?

[img] [/img]

The extent of her influence is of course debatable...

Have a look here
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/how-many-armies-does-the-queen-have

😆

Are you disputing:

that the Queen is head of state of 4 of the 5 eyes surveillance alliance countries?

Or that she has ultimate authority (albeit not absolute power) over several armies and intelligence services?

1. No, that is true.
2. Yes, if by "ultimate authority" you mean the power, in practice, to tell any of them what to do. This is because, in practice, the royal prerogative is not exercised by the Crown.

The extent of her influence is of course debatable...

As you are so ably demonstrating. As I understand it, your case that her influence is considerable rests on:

- the badges on those army hats;
- the existence of the Official Secrets Act; and
- the fact that elected governments have not put "protecting paedo-lizards from prosecution" in their election manifestos, ever.

But it isn't clear that we're getting far with this. 🙂

she has ultimate authority (albeit not absolute power)

Yes, if by "ultimate authority" you mean the power

The extent of her influence is of course debatable...

Goddamn it words are tricky things... you can see why lawyers get paid so healthily as they are basically sneaky wizards who manipulate words to the advantage of their clients.

Along with many points raised already, we have to factor in the 'Deep State', beyond the gaze of the Commons...

That includes many of the departments at Whitehall, who serve Her Majesty's Government and retain the same employees in Her Majesty's service, regardless of who is voted into parliament, for example, the Home Office, Foreign Office (both of whom have jurisdiction over intelligence services) the Ministry of Defence, the Privy Council (of which the Cabinet is the executive) and the Queens confidential weekly meetings with the Prime Minister (elected or otherwise)

Of course, that is just for the UK, we have to bear in mind there is similar institutions across the Commonwealth Realms:

The Crown's powers are exercised, either by the monarch personally or by his or her representative in each jurisdiction, on the advice of the appropriate local minister, legislature, or judges, none of which may advise the Crown on any matter pertinent to another of the Crown's jurisdictions.

So... given the Crown is a corporation and in cases where the commander in chief of the various armies who swear allegiance to the Queen isn't the Queen herself, but a representative of the Queen, who is the boss of the corporation known as [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crown ]The Crown[/url]?

[i]we have to factor in the 'Deep State', beyond the gaze of the Commons...[/i]

🙄

This thread is a fine example of how to, with the occasional visit, keep a complete nitwit away from other threads whilst he runs around and around his little obsessive caged hamster wheel of dimwittery.

Carry on.

we have to factor in the 'Deep State', beyond the gaze of the Commons...

🙄

[img] [/img]

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32044580 ]MPs 'monitored by Scotland Yard' [/url]

😐

As you were

Mr Woppit - Member
This thread is a fine example of how to, with the occasional visit, keep a complete nitwit away from other threads whilst he runs around and around his little obsessive caged hamster wheel of dimwittery.

Given some of the reactions, you'd think I was saying the corgis are in charge!

[img] [/img]

You'll thank me one day...

I think we can call that treason.
[img] [/img]

Goddamn it words are tricky things

Indeed they are. If you persistently use words like "authority" and "power" without any sensitivity to their context, you can get very confused about constitutional arrangements.

Also, including the "Home Office" as part of an unaccountable paedo-lizard "deep state" of which we know nothing just because the UK has a permanent, non-political civil service is fairly wild stuff. Again, plenty is written about why the civil service is the way it is. Explaining that simply doesn't require a paedo-lizard cover-up. But anyways...

🙂

You must've been getting in early for April Fools...

Would that be the Home Office that:

~reportedly funded the Paedophile Information Exchange

~Leon Brittan was in charge of

~is in charge of Police, Borders and MI5

~lost 114 files

~set up the 'independent' inquiry

~helped Fiona Woolf redraft letters to play down links to Leon Brittan

but anyway...

Just to be clear:

Do you believe that we have a permanent, non-political civil service [i]so that[/i] the lizards can always get a supply of minors to rape when they're having their parties?

Or are you just listing some things that have happened in a vast bureaucracy over several decades? 😉

Hmm, that's a debate in itself...

I guess when you refer to lizards, you're alluding to this scenario:

[img] [/img]

Whether or not that is the case remains to be seen, though recent allegations of Royal involvement and the resignation of the UKs highest ranking Catholic on similar issues suggests it may not be entirely impossible, horrific as it seems.

I'm not suggesting everyone within the Home Office is a child rapist, or that everyone in the Home Office is knowingly protecting child rapists...

That said, there are certainly elements of the security services who have done both of the above.

If Harold Wilson, the Prime Minister, and Jack Straw, the Home Secretary were spied on throughout their careers (along with several others~ on whose behalf remains to be seen), it seems foolish to imagine that similar surveillance wasn't carried out on Leon Brittan, who, along with Cyril Smith, frequented the Elm Guest House.

[img] [/img]

With that in mind, it doesn't seem very likely that high level members of the Home Office and Her Majesty's Government were completely ignorant to the allegations surrounding Leon Brittan (or indeed any of the MPs, or members of the supply chain involved in such activity) before advising on editing letters to play down associations between the chair of the inquiry into child abuse.

And that being the case, why is the IPCC now investigating claims that investigations into Leon Brittan (along with many others) were shelved?

After all, why would they edit the letters if there was nothing to hide?

No doubt over the coming months, more answers will be forthcoming, though given the past record of Her Majesty's Government, we will have to wonder how much is being held back in the interests of national security

[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]

That said, there are certainly elements of the security services who have done both of the above.

There are certainly elements of the bakery industry who have done both of the above.

Makes you think, doesn't it?

More bandwith wasted. And I'm just as guilty as you are of that, so here, have a picture which proves EVERYTHING!

[img] http://i4.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article780573.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/The%20Prince%20Of%20Wales%20smells%20a%20loaf%20made%20by%20Patrick%20Moore%20(L) [/img]

**** it, I'm going in for a guess....

...232 armies?.

Am I right? I'm right aren't i?

Hmm, maybe I should do a FOI request...

Ta da:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/how_many_armies_does_the_queen_h/new

and a few bonuses, just in case that illuminati business is legit:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/recruitment_of_justice_goddard_f

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/redrafting_of_fiona_woolfs_lette/new

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/allegiance_of_intelligence_servi

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_inquiry_into_child_a/new

Sooooo, FOI requests are now seen as "proof" of something are they?

The 10 weirdest FoI requests sent to councils

1. What plans are in place to protect the town from a dragon attack? (Wigan Council)

2. Please list all the types of animals you have frozen since March 2012, including the type and quantity of each animal? (Cambridge City Council)

3. How many times has the council paid for the services of an exorcist, psychic or religious healer? Were the services performed on an adult, child, pet or building? (Rossendale Council)

4. Please can you let me know how many roundabouts are located within your council boundaries? (Leicestershire County Council)

5. What precautions, preparations, planning and costings have been undertaken in the case an asteroid crashes into Worthing, a meteorite landing in Worthing or solar activity disrupting electromagnetic fields? (Worthing Borough Council)

6. How many holes in privacy walls between cubicles have been found in public toilets and within council buildings in the last 10 years? (Rossendale Council)

7. How many bodies are there in mortuaries that have been unclaimed for 10 years? How long have these bodies been in the mortuary? How old were they when they died? Is it possible to have the names of these people? (Richmond Council)

8. How many people in the town have a licence to keep a tiger, lion, leopard, lynx or panther as a pet? (Scarborough Council)

9. How many requests were made to council-run historic public-access buildings (e.g. museums) requesting to bring a team of 'ghost investigators' into the building? (Birmingham Council)

10. How many children in the care of the council have been micro-chipped? (Southend Council)

Makes you think, doesn't it?