Wills and Kate

Nearly took the kids to see them at Taronga zoo today but went for a ride instead. Glad I didnt as the crowds were so big they shut the zoo and traffic was chaos that way for hours.
Woolworths still alive and doing very very well down here.

anagallis_arvensis – Member
Ernie you are just proving my point for me well done.

I thought your point was that you are oppressed and subjugated on a daily basis…….how am I proving your point ?

Only confused by you THM, could you explain what point you are trying to make?
Mine is simply that the royals are just media whore celebs these days.

Care to explain how I am not opressed and subjugated?

Mine is simply that the royals are just media whore celebs these days.

And that republics have no such problem ?

I think I agree with THM on this one …..you sound a little confused.

I didnt say the last bit you just made up though did I?
Keep trying.

anagallis_arvensis – Member
Care to explain how I am not opressed and subjugated?

Well no, you obviously are.

Hope the oppression and subjugation isn’t too heavy for you today.

I blame the Normans.

AA are you free to live and work where you want. Can you marry who you want to? Can you save on spend your money as you choose? Do you have freedom of speech, religion, expression, will etc.? I’m guessing you answer yes to all those so what exactly is a monarchy stopping you from doing?

a_a, you can’t seriously be trying to convince anyone you’re oppressed can you? (I’m not having a cheap pop at you like some of the others here btw.) I agree with you that the concept of royalty is bollocks in a modern society where the concept of all “men” being born equal is accepted by the majority.

Of course, not being a subject of the monarch, the feeling of deference to the superiority of someone by virtue of who’s fanny he or she popped out of, as thm, Zulu and others display, is foreign to me, but I just asked mrs deadly who is a subject, and to be fair, she doesn’t appear to feel oppressed…only by me sometimes. 🙂

I’d hate to be born into royalty – looks like a pretty shit job to me – even with the fringe benefits.

Can you save on spend your money as you choose?

There isn’t an opt-out clause when paying tax that funds the royal family.

Freedom of speech is limited where the royals are concerned “adhering to the sovereign’s enemies”.

The head of the protestant church is the Queen which somewhat limits a protestant’s freedom of speech.

Nobody is free to live and work where they want. You can live somewhere you can afford to rent/buy and pay the taxes. You may then work there if your chosen work is deemed legal.

The level of oppression is obviously low but its still there according to the oxford english definition. The queen is the unelected head of state. Her unelected son has spent years writing letters to ministers about what we dont know and having an influence we dont know. Even thos trying to prevent the publication state it calls into question his impartiality and would cause a constitutional crisis if released.
Thats oppression.

Or taxes that fund anything or do republics have a pay what you want taxation policy?
Your freedom of speech example is about the same as being Edward snowdon.
At no point is the head of a church preventing free speech.
Again the live where you want is the same in every Republic so how are the monarchy the problem here?

The head of the protestant church is the Queen which somewhat limits a protestant’s freedom of speech.

Some people need to find out the meaning of the word oppression

Edukator, are you aware that old laws do not necessarily apply any more? I would not be prosecuted for treason if I were seduced by a royal (it has happened to other people afaik) nor would I be prosecuted for speaking ill of the royals.

Let me demonstrate: the royal family are a bunch of idiots.

Thats oppression.

No, it’s not

Very black and white ernie. Have a nice day.

Treason laws have been modified but still stand, Molgrips. It came close with Lady Di.

Are those photos from modern crusades led by her Majesty’s government, Ernie? With the much vaunted participation of the royal family.

It certainly could be argued that by having to pay tax to fund the monarchy, there is a fundamental degree of slavery in our working lives, albeit minor, however:

Ernie has a point, when it comes to oppression, there are plenty of places in the world where people suffer far more than we do.

Being as Palestine was a British Mandate, under whose authority was Israel formed again?

And who rules over the British forces that continue drone strikes after invading resource rich countries under false pretenses?

Back to domestic oppression, who presides over the murky dealings of GCHQ?

It’s that black and white A-A. Claims that this represents oppression : “The head of the protestant church is the Queen which somewhat limits a protestant’s freedom of speech” are clearly bollox.

I would wish you a nice day too but it would be insensitive of me as you’ve informed me that you are oppressed on a daily basis.

Try and make the best of it though eh ?

A song they used to sing in the NAAFI bar in Germany:

A sold’, a sold’, a soldier I will be
Two pist’, two pist’, two pistols on my knee
F’king, f’king, f’ king and country
We fight for the old count’, fight for the old count’, fight for the old country.

Are those photos from modern crusades led by her Majesty’s government, Ernie? With the much vaunted participation of the royal family.

It’s Palestine. Although when Her Majesty has a bit of spare time from oppressing A-A she does like to oppress other people throughout the world.

Of course your French government wouldn’t dream of doing such as a thing as France doesn’t have a monarchy, would it ?

So anyway, are the monarchy actually British enough to stir fierce patriotic impulses?

What happened to the real family name of Saxe Coburg Gotha?

Saxe Coburg Gotha was Jimmy Savile’s real name.

Saxe Coburg Gotha was Jimmy Savile’s real name.

I heard Mountbatten (another name changer) had something to do with it, hence why Savile and our Royal and glorious leaders were big mates since 1966

France in a crusade, no of course not. A bit of peace keeping now and then, drawing a line in the sand to stop an army about to attack a city. With the exception of France’s contribution in Afghanistan I haven’t had a problem with use of French armed force since I’ve been here.

Dominique de Villepin’s prophetic speech at the UN and Jacques Chirac’s refusal to join in with Bush’s fulfillment of biblical prophecies have pleased me.

Yes of course, France has never been involved in imperialist wars ever since it overthrew the monarchy.

…..Jacques Chirac’s refusal to join in with Bush’s fulfillment of biblical prophecies have pleased me.

Is that George Bush king of America that you speak of ?

BTW Jacques Chirac fought in France’s bloody Algerian War.

I just drove past Buckingham Palace. Loads of oppressed and subjugated people outside the place. In the rain as well.

It’s happening.

Have a nice day.

Indeed, a blessed Easter to all…..

I just drove past Buckingham Palace. Loads of oppressed and subjugated people outside the place. In the rain as well.

How many of the people who pay for it’s upkeep were inside the palace?

I haven’t been in Downing Street, but can live with the fact….

I wonder what the night rates at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave are?

The last time I went to Buckingham palace it was for the Olympic triathlon:

Me and other spectators

Never mind all that, my GF thinks baby George is gorgeous 🙂

Were there no public toilets nearby?

A French peasant child in un pantalon de Nîmes begging for food at the gates:

😆 took me a while for the penny to drop

Some people need to find out the meaning of the word oppression

I think he is being a bit OTT but it also shows the power of conformity here where we have grown up so used to their interference and undemocratic roles in our lives that we just accept it as normal and fine. Interesting look how UKIP ers and other rails against undemocratic oppressive EU with it its unelected [ they all are to some degree but it may be weak] and ignoring our head of state and the Lords in our executive. Its certainly not equality/democratic whatever you wish to call it.

Granted the antis are not helping themselves here with the high levels of hyperbole and oppression is a OTT. I see their point even though it has been badly made

The real problem with the anti rant and their oppression is that it would be no different under an elected head of state and in a lot of cases worse. Look a the the good old US of F’d up A, a president elected by the masses without the democratic law making powers to enact his policies. Standing there looking for some electoral Viagra to make a difference. Hunting down those that dare speak against them (snowdon & assange) suppressing their people and sending them off to war when more die on their own streets than in any war or terror attack.

The real problem with the anti rant and their oppression is that it would be no different under an elected head of state and in a lot of cases worse. Look a the the good old US of F’d up A, a president elected by the masses without the democratic law making powers to enact his policies. Standing there looking for some electoral Viagra to make a difference. Hunting down those that dare speak against them (snowdon & assange) suppressing their people and sending them off to war when more die on their own streets than in any war or terror attack.

That’s a very fair point… though it is easy to chase ideals, it’s far harder to achieve and sustain them, however, direct electronic democracy would remove the power hungry middlemen and the laws they devise to perpetuate the military industrial media complex and their own self interest. I doubt we’d suddenly be living in a perpetual utopia of unicorns and rainbows, but all improvement is incremental; it’d be a giant step in the right direction (and hence you should vote for me so I can dictate this brave new world and skim the perks 😳 )

Look a the the good old US of F’d up A, a president elected by the masses without the democratic law making powers to enact his policies. Standing there looking for some electoral Viagra to make a difference. Hunting down those that dare speak against them (snowdon & assange) suppressing their people and sending them off to war when more die on their own streets than in any war or terror attack.

To be fair the same could be said of the UK under a monarchy. Tony Blair who as Prime Minister had all the executive powers of a head of state, even if not the official title, was completely unable to enact his policies without the support of Parliament, the House of Commons to be specific. Royal prerogative or not.

And Tony Blair’s behaviour was not in any fundamental way different to that of George Bush’s. He was fully prepared to go to war on the pretext of fighting terrorism, despite the fact that terrorism is a very small problem in the UK and many more die on UK streets than in any war or terror attacks (he did create the conditions for terrorism to flourish in other countries though)

The bottom line is that having a constitutional monarchy is a complete irrelevance.

Despite what the haters or lovers want to say.

The bottom line is that having a constitutional monarchy is a complete irrelevance.

Despite what the haters or lovers want to say.

Oh FFS me and ernie agree, now where is the plug in that makes jivetroll disappear.

The bottom line is that having a constitutional monarchy is a complete irrelevance

Which is the problem, either they are irrelevant so whats the point or they do have power which is wrong. I hate what royalty symbolises but Charlies letters suggest that their influence may be greater than we are led to believe.
If they do **** all lets be rid of them and if they do hold power lets be rid of them. Win win for me 😀