Jump to content

The Queens Diamond Jubilee Celebrations Today


Bazj

Recommended Posts

What I find crap Baz, is your narrow view, anyone not thinking as you do is a traitor, anyone not conforming to your narrow view of what it is to be British is a traitor. Anyone not wearing Union Jack underwear is a traitor ect :wink:

 

not a narrow view at all Kije..... it is more than likely a majority view as the majority view is in favour of the monarchy....

 

It is your minority view that people find offensive when it comes to handing power to the unelected, corrupt edifice that is the EU and even more so when it comes to an elected head of state. It would cost far more in monetary terms to have a president and would bring far less revenue back as there would be no need for topurists to come and view the palaces etc and all the pomp and ceremony that goes with it because without the Queen or King, it would all be meaningless

 

Go live in France.... you'll like it there.... they are a republic and have growing right wing support!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not a narrow view at all Kije..... it is more than likely a majority view as the majority view is in favour of the monarchy....

 

It is your minority view that people find offensive when it comes to handing power to the unelected, corrupt edifice that is the EU and even more so when it comes to an elected head of state. It would cost far more in monetary terms to have a president and would bring far less revenue back as there would be no need for topurists to come and view the palaces etc and all the pomp and ceremony that goes with it because without the Queen or King, it would all be meaningless

 

Go live in France.... you'll like it there.... they are a republic and have growing right wing support!

 

 

Baz -you clearly hate living in a country where people are free to express their opinions - perhaps Zimbabawe, North Korea or Ssudi Arabia would suit you better :lol::lol::lol:

 

I am joking, I would not sink to your level.

 

I recognise, for example, the difference between patriotism and support for a particular form of head of state - can you or is your patriotism that superficial? Is there really any patriotism there or is it just a celebrity thing.

 

 

Why do you feel so threatened by those views if it is such a minority one, are you insecure in the validity of your beliefs. i think you'll find tne majority do not find minority views offensive - they may disagree but they are able to stay rational.

 

The EU is a red herring - we currently have both the monarchy and the EU.

 

There is no reason to suppose that an elected head of state would cost anywhere the same as this feudal system. There are plenty of examples where it costs a damn site less.

 

Tourism is another red herring - for excample places like Versailles manage perfectly well without a monarch, it is the history that sells it to visitors not the occupant of the throne and palaces - indeed it may well provide extra revenue with greater access for visitors once the monarch is removed completely from such places as Buckingham Palace and the various items held "in trust" for the nation exhibited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick.... you keep trying to convince yourself and Kije that you are right, but unfortunately you are in the minority and will be for a very very very long time.

 

I still see you as a traitor to the country and none of your republican jibber jabber will convince me otherwise

 

Just as an aside, how would one such as you serve as a serviceman or MP or Policeman if you wouldn't swear allegience to the Queen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There is no reason to suppose that an elected head of state would cost anywhere the same as this feudal system. There are plenty of examples where it costs a damn site less.

 

 

Go on then...... lets have some examples seeing as there are plenty.... a country the size of ours with a president that costs less (in real terms as the politicians say) plus bear in mind that the Queen and the family also pay tax back to the exchequer (something that I don't recall many presidents doing)

 

That attracts tourists in their millions to visit the palaces (all across the country; not just the Southern ones) That also attracts the same tourists for special events such as the Jubliee, Royal Weddings and countless other special occasions....

 

Even the American President doesn't attract that level of interest; visitors to the US are more likely to go and see Micky Mouse and a Space Shuttle than to visit Washington

 

 

I'm all ears and waiting to hear of these plenty of examples of countries with about 60million people who have Presidents that cost less than our Royal Family!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baz -you clearly hate living in a country where people are free to express their opinions - perhaps Zimbabawe, North Korea or Ssudi Arabia would suit you better

 

You really are clutching at straws now.... you are on a level with Kije when it comes to that one mate!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just as an aside, how would one such as you serve as a serviceman or MP or Policeman if you wouldn't swear allegience to the Queen?

 

For once you make a raise a valid issue, well done. You highlight another problem with the current sysytem and another reason to do away with the crown is that it does raise ethical issues for anyone who does not believe in the monarchy and who wants to serve their country in various capacities that require an oath to the monarch.

 

Example of a cheaper presidential system in a similar size country - okay I'll give you one, off the top of my head, France.

 

There are many others, and as I see no reason why costs ahould increase in proportion to the population so here's another one - Republic of Ireland.

 

(The apparent inability of your brain to see the difference between being a republican and being a traitor is quite sad really. Are you perhaps blinded by irrational, almost oedipal feelings for the queen as a universal mother figure - balanced by ill-feelings towards the male- dominanted political world - which can be seen in some ways as a father figure? :shock::lol::lol::lol: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm getting fed up with this.

Is there any point to this stupid bickering? Expressing your thoughts and your support of something seems ok, but this tit for tat is totally unnecessary. Given that most support the Queen and recognise what she has done for this country, there is no point in knocking her. That is the system we have, the Pomp and Pageantry is by far the best in the world and brings in a lot of tourism.

Leave well alone.

IF you want to save money, get rid of half of the MPs Councillors and the EU and we will be quids in. IF the monarchy offends your tastes, as the PM of Australia says, you don't have to live here, and should maybe consider somewhere where your views would be better suited. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that most support the Queen and recognise what she has done for this country, there is no point in knocking her. That is the system we have,

 

So if at the next election the Labour party win with a vast majority, all other parties should shut up till the next election. :unsure: :unsure:

 

British membership of the EEC was endorsed by 67% of those voting, should our EU sceptics keep their mouths shut? :unsure: :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hang about Peter, if your view had prevailed in the English Cival War, we would still have an absolute Monoarcky. It is thanks to people with other views that you have the system we have now. And what are you trying to do. Stop any more evolution of our system or any talk of it.

 

 

I await with interest your answering of Wolfies questions :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The EEC is long dead and gone Wolfie..... it lived for such a short time until the greedy power hungry Germans and French started the metamorphosis of the EEC into the superstate they craved.

 

I would bet that if you were to show those 67% of people a glimpse into the future and what the EU has become they would never have voted yes in a million years (Of course under the EU dictatorship we have now; if they had voted no, they would have had to keep going back to the ballot box until they got the "right" answer that the EU wanted).

 

Don't forget that the majority of the people who had the vote back in the early seventies were those who had fought against Germany and saved the asses of the French..... there is no way they would have voted to give Germany power over the rest of Europe when they had spent 6 years trying to stop that very thing!

 

And just to cap it all; it seems Spain is now at the begging bowl stage in its economic Euro journey!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Zimbabwe would suit him best, As anyone not agreeing with the head od State ends up beaten up or dead, for not thinking the head of State knows best :wink:

 

Erm.... aren't you the one disagreeing with the head of state Kije.... you're the one who wants a President under the ridiculous notion that it would be better for the country!??? I'm fully in agreement with our head of State so your arguement falls a little flat I'm afraid!

 

Its a shame when you can't even quote a decent example to serve your flimsy and weak republican nonsense!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if at the next election the Labour party win with a vast majority, all other parties should shut up till the next election. :unsure: :unsure:

 

British membership of the EEC was endorsed by 67% of those voting, should our EU sceptics keep their mouths shut? :unsure: :unsure:

 

 

The politicians just yap between elections, they are not constructive at all. That has nowt to do with the Monarchy topic anyway. Stop doing an obs or a Kije.

 

When we had a referendum, it was for the Common Market, NOT for what we have now, which is a Dictatorship by the EU to which we now have NO say.

We pay in vast amounts of money to belong to this exclusive club, for which we then have to salute and obey orders from Brussels.

 

IF the MP's thought that they would get 67% to stay in the EU, we would then get a referendum. As it is, they think the opposite and therefore we don't and won't get a referendum. It gets more like Russia every day. :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hang about Peter, if your view had prevailed in the English Cival War, we would still have an absolute Monoarcky. It is thanks to people with other views that you have the system we have now. And what are you trying to do. Stop any more evolution of our system or any talk of it.

 

 

I await with interest your answering of Wolfies questions :wink:

 

 

English Civil War???? I thought we were in 2012?

 

I am a firm believer that change, should be an improvement, not change for changes sake. Usually, when change takes place (under the guise of evolvement) someone stands to make a lot of money.The gravy train being an example.

 

Surely, IF we wanted to be a partner in the EU, the country as a whole would be embracing it. Even the politicians don't dare go that last mile because they know that the public are not exactly happy about it.

 

I have answered Wolfie's post, but before you comment, I was typing it when Baz put his post up, so I was unaware of any comment made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baz, it was republicans that gave you the democracy you now live in! Zimbabwe would suit you because you share the same views on criticism of the president, and would bring the same in here.

 

Change would save money!, and how else could we change Peter,other than evolvement . If we don't evolve we stagnate, which I think would Suit some on here. Every new idea starts as a minority view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When peopled are prevented from questioning and criticising the majority view we end up with corrupt control. Since the 67% majority vote for the EEC, we have been prevented from re-examining the decision. As a result it has ended up as a very expensive carbuncle that everyone has to put up with.

 

With any decision, everyone, whether in a majority or not should be free to question and debate the issues. Everything evolves, even the Royal Family, otherwise we would still have Kings or Princes who see off their wives for a different model.................. :unsure: :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change would save money!,

 

Yet another wild and unsubstantiated comment Kije.......

 

Every new idea starts as a minority view.

 

Yes.... I remember Nazisim was like that in its early days!!

 

I found this on the cost of the Royal Family..... makes interesting reading; especially the bit at the end which mentions the cost of presidential elections in the US etc, as I hadn't even thought of that!!

 

Cost of the Roayl Family

 

"The official answer is 38.5 million pounds last year (about US$63.5 million). But that does not include security which would probably be several times that amount.

 

In the official answer is travel and the royal helicopter and train (they do not have a jet, but must charter one for every flight), and upkeep of the occupied royal palaces. They do not receive a salary.

 

Every year they divide the cost by the total number of people in the United Kingdom (roughly 62 million) to get something of about 67 pence per person to run the monarchy.

 

The requested budget for the US department of State is 258 times that of the British royal household. The US State department educational and cultural programs budget is $637 million (ten times the cost of the monarchy).

 

The total cost of the British Royal Household is tiny compared to just the president's travel budget. It is also a fractional cost of an American election"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baz, you are comparing the UK, with the USA :shock: ,

 

The UK would fit into the State of California, perhaps it would be better, to compare us with the State of California's governors election, how much does the President of Germany cost, that position in Germany is mostly ceremonial like that of are queen, again a fairer comparison :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baz, you are comparing the UK, with the USA :shock: ,

 

The UK would fit into the State of California, perhaps it would be better, to compare us with the State of California's governors election, how much does the President of Germony cost, that position in Germany is mostly ceremonial like that of ur queen, again a fairer comparison :wink:

 

What you have to remmeber, Lt, is that as far as Baz is concerned it's okay to cherry pick examples whcih suit his view but to ignore ones which don't.

 

 

The same mentality applies with throwing up examples such as Zimbabwe, and the interweb default setting of bringing up the Nazis :roll: .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...