The Telegraph even wants us to watch him not singing the anthem: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...or-first-official-engagement-wearing-tie.html Next they'll be saying that not dyeing his beard with Grecian 2000 is disrespectful to Lord Kichener and all who fought in WWI. Seriously, why are the right wing press using fascism to berate an individual during a celebration of a defeat of, er, fascism?
And as we replied last time you posted this 'point', Parliament is sovereign and makes laws, and if Parliament passes a law saying **** off and give us your money, then, as the Romanovs and Louis XVI found out, that's what they have to do.
Bull it would. The Tories would probably give it to the royals but no other party would and the Tories would never kick the royal family out. So if the royals lost the crown they'd also lose the crown estate. It's public money and there is nothing the royals could do about it if it was given back to the people from which it was taken.
It's nuts aint it. People are pretty aware these days and whilst there are idiots who will lap all this character assassination up, there are those who will support him purely because they are trying very hard to drag him down. So much for being judged on a job by how you do it. No one in the media talks about the Cameron gov supplying weaons to 19 of the 23 countrys the UN has on a list for crimes against children and Child soldier crimes. Lowering the flag for the Saudi kind, head chopping activist flogging **** scumbag, who has his own daughters under house arrest for years because they fight for women's rights
Pretty much, but as I said before, as things stand the ****s own Buckingham palace, this Crown holdings bollocks is only a con to get the tax payer to fund the ****s. They make fortunes in their own right without tax payer money. They rent out Buckingham palace for Big banker dinners to JP Morgan and the like, for big bucks too. Also, all of their wealth are in offshore possessions, they pay no tax on most of their wealth
Yep, defend them mate.When someone says you don't need them, they are a relic and you say they generate income for the UK, it's defending their position. It is true that even without the royals people will come see the palace and other places. No one books a 2 week holiday to the UK based solely on something they see that takes an hour. Talk about underselling the country
Not defend, just point out the value of a royal family Again as you are not British I know you will fail to see my pride in this, it's part of our national identity and rich history. 'You are unwashed and uncultured ect. You are to them as **** is to your shoe' - You make bold statements on how they view me Talk about bias
On BBC4 this morning (some interview) he stated that he wanted to change PMQ's from the circus it is and actually ask questions. A refreshing chance, however lets see if it decends into the usual chaos and mud slinging rather than sensible debate
Another gem of the Tories Threat to scrap Human Rights Act could see UK follow Nazi example, warns UN official http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-nazi-example-warns-un-official-10287557.html
Actually they are based in facts. Philip was quoted as saying he'd like to come back as a virus and kill you all Did you ever learn a bit of history ffs you illiterate, the plutocracy and monarchies always seen as as the unwashed masses that didn't have the intelligence and culture to know what's best for us. Historical fact. Why do you think there is a class system in society? And everything else I said is accurate. Looka t history, now and then comes along a man who can talk directly to the people and get support and bypass the social structure, like Caesar for example, Kennedy is another, and we know what the plutocracy did to them, killed them. This is exactly why someone like Corbyn who "may" gain the support of the "unwashed masses" is a threat. I aint comparing Corbyn to anyone, just the situation.. the attacks on Corbyn is the establishment protecting it's self just in case he might actually succeed however unlikely they will employ risk mitigation via character assassination. It's a ****ed up world where people are born in to their futures, and the UK and most of the rest of the world is pretty much like that.
But that is not the modern roayl family is it And as to what Phil says You shouldn't really care as they are not something that you have to 'fund' or 'defend' But you have a very strong opinion on them ;-)
Tbf Sis, my history teacher in the 6th form, a committed Marxist, always maintained that over-population and lack of birth control was a church/authority conspiracy of the ages that held the poor back.
Under which laws will we be stripping the royals of there assets then? Or will we be comming up with new laws for the sake of setting a dangerous precedent of government being able to seize private property for non criminal reasons? It really doesn't matter which party tries to do it, under current law the royals would get the crown estate. It isn't public money no matter how much people might like it to be.
