Epstein / Andrew Mountbatten Windsor / Maxwell

  • Thread starter Thread starter mat
  • Start date Start date
AlexWilliamsGloves said:
What are the consequences to this? I can understand in a military setting youd probably get a bollocking...but in a "private" setting such as that golf club

Not that id be the sort of person to frequent a posh golf club, but id be more than happy to "ignore", and even make it known i was doing it deliberately
Click to expand...
In the military, it's classed as disobeying an order, in this case, King's Regulations. KR's are a set of written regulations and orders that govern the military and it includes Royal protocols.

In civilian life it could be considered 'bringing an organisation into disrepute' and may be against rules of membership and subject to disciplinary action.
 
johnny crossan said:
SNP Stephen Flynn weighing in to the class war chorus on this subject - they just can't resist any chance to run down the country, their presence in our parliament is a sick joke.
Click to expand...

They don't want to be in our parliament though, so you're on the same page there. I don't think you can blame anyone from any party for having something to say about the sex pest formerly known as prince.
 
supercity88 said:
They don't want to be in our parliament though, so you're on the same page there. I don't think you can blame anyone from any party for having something to say about the sex pest formerly known as prince.
Click to expand...
They should do the decent thing like the IRA, stay where they are happy and spare us the burden of listening to their separatist drivel.
 
A matter of debate. Some would say the Jacobite claimant. Others, the senior representative of the House of York - probably a descendant of George, Duke of Clarence.

But as far as I'm concerned, it's like asking what size driving wheel should be put on the new express steam engine for the Manchester-Euston run. A quarrel over an anachronism.
 
More I look at this the more I'm convinced William pushed this so his first act as King wasn't doing it anyway.

Prince Andrew will find a sympathetic ear somewhere sadly as we have lots of royal fawners here who won't think I'll of him or the family at whatever cost.
 
BrianW said:
A matter of debate. Some would say the Jacobite claimant. Others, the senior representative of the House of York - probably a descendant of George, Duke of Clarence.

But as far as I'm concerned, it's like asking what size driving wheel should be put on the new express steam engine for the Manchester-Euston run. A quarrel over an anachronism.
Click to expand...
I'm with those who believe the Hanoverian succession avoided another civil war and that the power denied to an elected head of state by a constitutional monarchy is a massive advantage in preserving democracy - see other the record of other European countries retaining a monarchy.
 
I believe the Republic of Ireland has the ideal constitutional arrangement. I would also quietly mention that having a king in Italy did not prevent the dictator Mussolini from taking power. Indeed, King Victor Emmanuel III enabled it and supported it up to the point where Mussolini's regime became completely untenable.

If I thought the royals could prevent fascists from taking over, I'd be all for them. Unfortunately, there is no reason to think that they could or would. Indeed, the excessive power of a British Prime Minister arises almost solely from their ability to exercise the so-called 'royal prerogative.' A concept which has no place in a true democracy.
 
TinFoilHat said:
More I look at this the more I'm convinced William pushed this so his first act as King wasn't doing it anyway.

Prince Andrew will find a sympathetic ear somewhere sadly as we have lots of royal fawners here who won't think I'll of him or the family at whatever cost.
Click to expand...
Yes the ones that justify the existence of The Royal Family by the totally false claim that they generate so much in tourist revenue
 
johnny crossan said:
I'm with those who believe the Hanoverian succession avoided another civil war and that the power denied to an elected head of state by a constitutional monarchy is a massive advantage in preserving democracy - see other the record of other European countries retaining a monarchy.
Click to expand...
Yes. Since the Glorious Revolution, Germans have been well known for keeping the peace in Europe. Up Hanover!
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
If he loses the Duke of York title don’t see why he can’t lose the Prince title too.

Heard some bullshit earner that this can’t happen because he’s the son of a monarch like it’s an immutable law of physics. Conventions change all the time.

‘Andy Wanker’ would be a fitting way to mark his self imposed demise.
Click to expand...
Fixed.
 
BrianW said:
I believe the Republic of Ireland has the ideal constitutional arrangement. I would also quietly mention that having a king in Italy did not prevent the dictator Mussolini from taking power. Indeed, King Victor Emmanuel III enabled it and supported it up to the point where Mussolini's regime became completely untenable.

If I thought the royals could prevent fascists from taking over, I'd be all for them. Unfortunately, there is no reason to think that they could or would. Indeed, the excessive power of a British Prime Minister arises almost solely from their ability to exercise the so-called 'royal prerogative.' A concept which has no place in a true democracy.
Click to expand...
The president of the USA has the equivalent of the Royal Prerogative and, I am reliably informed, used it to set free those who tried to overthrow democracy on J6. He cannot, however, appoint bishops.
The current SCOTUS wants to extend this power by making presidential executive orders to be the law under the unitary executive/ presidency theory. In both the US and UK, the prerogative is currently subject to the courts as Boris discovered when the Supreme Court found his proroguing of parliament to be illegal.
Thus it cannot be said that the UK prime minister has excessive power. Much more worrying is the pernicious ‘influence’ of the royals. Charlie has twice used this to negate planning permissions already given: the national gallery and Chelsea barracks.
The Homeopathic hospital within the NHS is, thanks to Charlie, not subject to NICE and he has had some success in holding back genetic engineering as that is “god’s work.”
Of course, Charlie is immune from prosecution and SCOTUS has granted the same to POTUS.
But no-one is above the law, ha ha.
 
Last edited:
BrianW said:
It amazes me that anyone still has an iota of respect for this dysfunctional family. They're not even the proper UK royal family. Just the descendants of a tinpot German dynasty that won the lottery in 1714.
Click to expand...
Well, yes. Charles - affair, friendship with Saville. Ann - multiple affairs. Camilla - affair. Elizabeth - £12m hush money. Andrew - Epstein, alleged paedophile. Mountbatten - visits to Irish children's homes. Phillip - affairs. William - alleged affair.
The press protects them for mutual benefit - photos for favours - and will relentlessly attack those it sees as a danger. Here is just one example:

www.boredpanda.com

15 Headlines Show How Differently The British Press Treat Meghan Markle Vs Kate Middleton

Here are some of the things that British journalists only seemed to think were wrong once Meghan did them.
www.boredpanda.com www.boredpanda.com

 
Last edited:
AlexWilliamsGloves said:
What are the consequences to this? I can understand in a military setting youd probably get a bollocking...but in a "private" setting such as that golf club

Not that id be the sort of person to frequent a posh golf club, but id be more than happy to "ignore", and even make it known i was doing it deliberately
Click to expand...
Fuck all would happen unless the nonce complained to the committee, it’s not a law, but like all these places they’ll have a set of rules you adhere to or they’ll come for you, royals can kiss my arse especially that twat.
 
TinFoilHat said:
More I look at this the more I'm convinced William pushed this so his first act as King wasn't doing it anyway.

Prince Andrew will find a sympathetic ear somewhere sadly as we have lots of royal fawners here who won't think I'll of him or the family at whatever cost.
Click to expand...
I don’t think he’d fancy sanctuary in Crumpsall though…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top