Monarchy has had it's day bye bye

[HVYMTL]

Firstly HVYMTL I did not say that the Queen was above politics she is the head of state.

She's a figurehead only, if you look at the history the Royals have been massively disempowered for a very long time. To the best of my (admittedly limited) knowledge The Queen has never countermanded any legislation put before her by the democratically elected representatives in Parliament. Her behaviour has therefore been pretty much the anti-thesis of a meddling dictator.

Secondly she took an oath which she has broken. No-one made her break that oath she did so willingly.

And you have proof of that claim? Because if you do, then you need to make that proof publicly known since no action can be taken without appropriate grounds. If you don't have any proof and your just blowing hot air then kindly STFU until you do.

Not going along with the EU might've resulted in another war is like saying if you don't wear a seat belt you might hurt yourself driving your car.

That is just absurd beyond ridiculous, how old are you?

The Law of this Land was written in the Magna Carta and that is still in effect today.

Well actually the Magna Carta was rejected shortly after it was made, however the spirit of the Charter remains and is the basis of both the legitimacy of the Monarchy and the actions of the Barons when they decided to take the steps involved with enacting article 61.

Allowing some politicians in Brussels to decide on Laws which affect me and others in this country is no different to a dictatorship.

I couldn't agree more.

If you're happy to allow public money to the tune of £200 million a year to be paid to an old woman and her extended family, so that they can travel the globe waving and collecting bouquets of flowers then that's your choice.

So that's the only basis of your argument, money? How shallow and pathetic is that... £3 a year, less than a penny a day... I wonder how much more free you will be able to make yourself if instead of investing your daily penny in our Sovereign you instead spent it on securing your house, or buying weapons. Heck if you saved up for a century I know a guy who could get you a gun, however bullets are extra.

Just how much did we spend on that bloody new aircraft carrier? Several billion or so? And why are we building that at all if there is no chance that the collapse of the EU project is going to bring about another war where it will be needed?

How many people are aware of the fact that the Queen has committed treason?

Not many, however I ask again, do you have PROOF? Nothing can be done without it.

If they were made aware would they seriously allow her to be hanged? No the reason being she's the Queen a lovely old lady who does wonderful things for this country of ours.

I would imagine not on the grounds that the vast majority of people these days are more enlightened than you seem to be and don't agree with such medieval crap as the death penalty.

[Thomas]

How many people are aware of the fact that the Queen has committed treason?

Not many, however I ask again, do you have PROOF? Nothing can be done without it.

Every time Royal assent is given to any and all legislation.

And loads more here too and it's been to court (for the record; their legislation)

http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm

[primate72]

all in favour of prince harry taking the healm? not charles cause hes a bawbag and not william although hes fine in my eyes not done anything wrong but if its true hes the 666th 33rd degree freemason lets just take a fucking lesson in history and not take that chance, so harry? plus hes a weed smoker so hes already more in touch with most of us than the rest of his family, true he might have a shitty blood line on his fathers side but he has the blood of diana aswell so i say lets give him a chance!

harry isn't charles son,he's hewitts boy.dianna had an affair with hewitt.maybe im wrong but i thought that was common knowledge.any way i still wouldnt have any more of them lot.no offence intended.

[Anglo-Saxon]

Meet King George a b.......... sorry a Rothschild
http://www.one-evil.org/people/people_1 ... schild.htm

Meet head of the Feudal System in the UK

British Monarchy Web site

Queen Elizabeth II - INVESTORS IN PEOPLE

Job description
Trainee Butler required

45 Hours a Week Contract Type ....£15,000 a year with 3 months at other residences apply within

Closing date for applicants 8 April 2012

https://atsv7.wcn.co.uk/search_engine/j ... 77691ef060

[primate72]

The idea of a Monarch King or Queen will always take the assumption that they are above the rest of society and NOT equal

our Queen took an oath and broke that oath when she allowed us to be subjected to European Laws.

Hold on just one moment... the democratically elected government made that treaty. IF your right that monarchs always take the assumption they are above everyone, then why did the Queen risk being charged with treason in order to destroy her own kingdom (Queendom doesn't sound quite right)?

On the one hand your complaining that the monarch is above politics, is not equal and can exert influence over politics and the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives in Parliament, and on the other hand your complaining that the Queen didn't hold her self above the democratic process in order to influence it... make up your mind, do you want the game to have a referee or not?

Also consider that not going along with the EU might of resulted in another war in Europe, and also that the Queen may of been co-erced. If you believe Diana was murdered, then you have to admit if the Queen was told, "sign here or Harry get's it", she would probably, and quite understandably, sign the bit of paper. The Royals are not bullet proof, and their traditional role which worked in the age of castles and swords, is not so easy in this day and age.

Nobody in the press or media will mention that because they are too busy licking Liz's backside in the hope that one day she might stick a ribbon on them which gives them the status of OBE or MBE or even Sir/Dame.

What utter rubbish, for a start the documents proving that treason has been committed have only recently been released under the 30 year law (see the videos by Albert Burgess), for seconds the media is controlled and coerced by the very same people who are shoe-horning us into the EU anyway.

Just what do you expect the Queen to do exactly? If she interferes with the government, then she is a tyrant and a despot who doesn't want us to join the EU because it undermines her power and how dare she hold her self above the will of the people etc etc etc, and if she does nothing she is a traitor and has let us down... this is a untenable situation for a frail old woman to be in!

SHE'S JUST A HUMAN BEING AND SHE'S AN OLD WOMAN.. COMPRENDEZ?

all in favour of prince harry taking the healm?

In 1173 my ancestor Simon sided with Prince Henry the younger in a rebellion. It was quite a shock for me to discover that and the fact that Harry's real name is actually Henry, and I have a feeling that if it came to it, and for what little it's worth, I might well decide to back Harry if he decided to stand against his brother.

plus hes a weed smoker so hes already more in touch with most of us than the rest of his family

Always a good sign

true he might have a shitty blood line on his fathers side but he has the blood of diana aswell so i say lets give him a chance!

Actually there is some speculation that Harry is actually the son of James Hewitt.



As for "Shitty" DNA, thank you for the insult; apparently I've probably got a strand or two of that stuff myself, but I'll try not to let it make me feel superior to you or anything... ROFL.

i hear what you are saying but there never was a referee to start with.not if queen elisabeth was concerned anyway.that role that she was supposed to be filling had long been taken out of her hands,but being born into that role she just done what she thought she had to do,well what she had no choice in doing,all those stamps of royal accent were mearly a job to keep her status.now im not against queen elisabeth or her family at all.i can see the predicament she has found herself in.i didnt used to have this view on the royals.because i thought that if they was supposed to be our representatives then something was terribly wrong.now i know that we havnt had a true monarch for centuries due to the fact that king john actually believed he would go to hell if he did not get the blessings from pope innnocent the 3rd.she is just a mascot.the politicians know this,but the unsuspecting public do not.i do think we need a ruler but one that does see all as equal.i feel this day is just around the corner.i have lost hope,and i care not for obumma's change either.

[frogmanbrabs]

HVYMTL if you are just going to hurl insults at others because their comments or opinions are diferent to yours then maybe you're the one that should STFU. As far as I'm aware Freedom of Speech is something we are blessed with in Britain and as long as the moderators are happy to allow me to post on this site then I will, but I will also show a tolerance to others postings and views whether I agree or disagree with them.

[Thomas]

she is just a mascot.the politicians know this,but the unsuspecting public do not.i do think we need a ruler but one that does see all as equal.i feel this day is just around the corner.i have lost hope,and i care not for obumma's change either.

Just a mascot who happens to be the richest woman (and her family with her banking family) in the world at the expense of everybody else but the 1%. I.E the New World Order.

[HVYMTL]

How many people are aware of the fact that the Queen has committed treason?

Not many, however I ask again, do you have PROOF? Nothing can be done without it.

Every time Royal assent is given to any and all legislation.

And loads more here too and it's been to court (for the record; their legislation)

http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm

I meant proof that there was no coercion, involved. I.E, prove that the Queen has knowingly and willingly committed an act of treason. Since you are attempting to make a lawful argument, you must adhere to the principles of the law, one very important aspect of which is the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven. If you don't stick strictly to the principles of the law, then your departing from the rule of law, and your argument is not a lawful one, but a political one, and your politics are those of blood and vengeance.

HVYMTL if you are just going to hurl insults at others because their comments or opinions are diferent to yours then maybe you're the one that should STFU. As far as I'm aware Freedom of Speech is something we are blessed with in Britain and as long as the moderators are happy to allow me to post on this site then I will, but I will also show a tolerance to others postings and views whether I agree or disagree with them.

Absolutely there is freedom of speech, which includes saying that unless you have proof of your ACCUSATIONS you ought to STFU, for your own sake, because otherwise your speech is LIBELOUS and SLANDEROUS, and that is a CRIME.

You can hold any point of view you like, you can voice any opinion you want, but in so doing you automatically give others the right to call you out if your talking crap and potentially incriminating yourself by making serious allegations without proof or even a shred of evidence to back them up.

If I was to say in public that I believe your a drug dealer, and I had no evidence what so ever to back it up, I would expect to be held accountable for slander and liable when it is revealed I said it for no reason other than a personal desire to slur your name. That's called reality... don't like it? Well fucking tough.. deal with it.

any way i still wouldnt have any more of them lot.no offence intended.

I can well understand your feeling, but as others have pointed out, "that lot" as you put it, have had no real power for centuries, by the demand of the people, it is logically therefore invalid to suggest that they are at fault for not using powers that the people don't allow them to have in the first place. It's also a form of reverse bigotry and prejudice to suggest without having met them at all, that you know anything about their character. Personally I hold that all people are the same deep down, you, me, us, them, it makes no difference and you could put anyone in that spot and the same thing would of happened under the same set of circumstances that have occurred. If your going to suggest otherwise then your making a suggestion that they are in fact different to other people, something which you also and quite correctly hold to be fundamentally incorrect... that is a contradiction and a logical fallacy.

[frogmanbrabs]

Absolutely there is freedom of speech, which includes saying that unless you have proof of your ACCUSATIONS you ought to STFU, for your own sake, because otherwise your speech is LIBELOUS and SLANDEROUS, and that is a CRIME.

And under what Law do you deem this to be true?

[HVYMTL]

Under the law of;

If you lived in my town, and you went around making false accusations and maliciously slandering me in public, and we happened to live in Anarchy where we make our own law, I'd set a precedent by smashing your fucking face in

COMPRENDEZ?

Personally I think the way we do things under monarchy is far more civilised. I'm not a lawyer so I can't quote you a specific judgement under common law, or any legislation or acts etc, however it is common knowledge to anyone who isn't a mindless moron that you can't go around making spurious false accusations against people because it's slander and a crime to do so.

It's also rather rude, deceitful, underhanded, and an invitation to conflict which is very much against the spirit of the law and against the principles of the common law, on which your attempting to base an accusation in the first place, despite having nothing to back it up other than your own bias, bigotry, jealousy and hatred.