Queen Elizabeth II

mat said:
A lot of people will go down to London wanting to pay their respects. I'm concerned that there maybe too many and some very emotional royalists will blow their tops in grief should they not be able to visit her in the alloted time.

At work, staff have been told to prepare for high passenger numbers going down to London by train.
Click to expand...
What trains?
 
mat said:
And I don't mean to crossover the thread with another royal one. The same media didn't give a fuck about Harry's missus and some of the awkward exchanges she's had with the public.
Click to expand...
Indeed, they've been shouting at her since...

well, since she was black.
 
Feel uneasy with these arrests, thought we were a democracy. We have freedom of speech to arrest someone because of a sign or shouting something which is against a person in power is very much like a dictatorship.
 
pride in battle said:
Of course life goes on as normal but out of 4 people not one of you brought up one of the most significant chapters in our recent history ? I find that incredible, a royalist or not surely it would have been mentioned ?
Click to expand...
No, not really. The only sort of reference, if you can call it that, was learning one of the group wouldn't be meeting us. As he is known for his extreme right wing views, we jokingly said his socialist principles meant he thought it would be disrespectful to the Queen to be coming out having some fun.

That was right at the start of the evening when only two of us were present I'm not disagreeing with you as it is a significant event, but when all four of us were together, it was never mentioned.
 
argyle said:
Fucking hell. Are you for real?

You start off your post with "Im no fan of Prince Andrew, but..."

You're then worried more about the technical use of term paedophile and then use a useless anecdote.

So let me spell out what happened, he was friends with a known Paedophile and continued to be so after he was convicted. He would regular go to his addresses and his private island where young girls were on offer.

One of the girls he slept with was trafficked. She was trafficked by a convicted Paedophile.

He paid that girl, now a woman, £12m.

A young boy then heckled him over the fact that he probably would be in prison if he wasn't the son of a Queen... and many the British public side with the Paedophile.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am for real.

Let us break this down:

"he was friends with a..." so if I'm friend with a bad person (and I don't know about why they are bad) does that make me bad too?

You make reference to 'young girls' but my point is 17 isn't young: in fact when I was that age, the 17 year old girls were much more mature than me and usually wanted to go out with lads aged 20+ (to my and my mates annoyance).

Did he know she was 'trafficked' and again, that is a very emotive word. Trafficked is usually associated with sex workers crossing the channel etc. I assume with this situation it was totally different, yet the same terminology is still applied?

Why? Maybe because some people want to have a pop at the royal family and he is the easiest target to shoot at.
 
El_george said:
Yes, I am for real.

Let us break this down:

"he was friends with a..." so if I'm friend with a bad person (and I don't know about why they are bad) does that make me bad too?

You make reference to 'young girls' but my point is 17 isn't young: in fact when I was that age, the 17 year old girls were much more mature than me and usually wanted to go out with lads aged 20+ (to my and my mates annoyance).

Did he know she was 'trafficked' and again, that is a very emotive word. Trafficked is usually associated with sex workers crossing the channel etc. I assume with this situation it was totally different, yet the same terminology is still applied?

Why? Maybe because some people want to have a pop at the royal family and he is the easiest target to shoot at.
Click to expand...
Age of consent in the UK is 16, in the US it’s 17/18.

She was a very well traveled girl before being introduced to him and has made millions on the trafficking accusations.
Good on her, more street smart IMO.
 
El_george said:
he was friends with a..." so if I'm friend with a bad person (and I don't know about why they are bad) does that make me bad too?
Click to expand...

If you think Andrew didn’t know Epstein was “bad” it makes you either naive in the extreme or desperate to excuse his behaviour. He was filmed and photographed in his presence well after he was convicted of child prostitution.
 
Brewster's millions said:
I’m not suggesting that the Queen was perfect, as nobody is.

My argument is that with each and every approach to having a head of state - who as a requirement of the job should remain impartial - there will be pros and cons, and most pertinently some potential for that individual to pursue self-interest.

If we have an elected head of state, which a lot of people seem to advocate for some reason, then I can’t see how the various candidates could remain apolitical. For me, the very moment they present themselves for election, the process automatically becomes political, as they would have a prospectus, an agenda, and a different appeal to different sections of society. Further, when you consider that the pool of candidates would very likely emerge almost entirely from former politicians, then any prospect of remaining apolitical and avoiding self-interest would reduce even further.

How would an elected head of state behave when public opinion shifts, when they or the party they used to represent approach re-election, or when their own popularity is under pressure? Would the scope for self-interest really be reduced? I would also argue that having someone in the job for life would naturally leave them better placed to adopt a longer view.

No system is perfect, but if the Queen’s various alleged discretions really are the sum damage inflicted over the course of 70 years, then I think we’ve done remarkably well.
Click to expand...

Your last paragraph I would also agree with despite my previous post. That record is why she was in position for so long and remained so well respected. I'd be very surprised if Charles or any future King or Queen could match her record.

You are right on the head of state, and they would be political and elected. I said over the weekend I have little faith in this country to replace our current system with an improved one. A head of state such as a president can cause a lot of issues. They could be from a different party to the legislature causing major problems in driving policies forwards and they can be very difficult to remove from post. Trump showed us that. If you thought Boris was slow to fall on his sword, as President he may have been even harder to force out.

For me it is a conversation I am interested in, but it is way down the list of priorities. Proportional representation rather than first past the post is a much more critical change we should push for. I am also happy to admit I am unlikely to have much time for threads about the monarchy once the football begins again!
 
supercity88 said:
Your last paragraph I would also agree with despite my previous post. That record is why she was in position for so long and remained so well respected. I'd be very surprised if Charles or any future King or Queen could match her record.

You are right on the head of state, and they would be political and elected. I said over the weekend I have little faith in this country to replace our current system with an improved one. A head of state such as a president can cause a lot of issues. They could be from a different party to the legislature causing major problems in driving policies forwards and they can be very difficult to remove from post. Trump showed us that. If you thought Boris was slow to fall on his sword, as President he may have been even harder to force out.

For me it is a conversation I am interested in, but it is way down the list of priorities. Proportional representation rather than first past the post is a much more critical change we should push for. I am also happy to admit I am unlikely to have much time for threads about the monarchy once the football begins again!
Click to expand...
Wholeheartedly agree on your last point - can’t wait for the game tomorrow!
 
kaz7 said:
Andrew not allowed to wear his uniform , where the fuck did edward get his from ? He hasnt served i dont think

This is a tough walk for the king ,up a steep hill, stand by william!
Click to expand...
He served for a few weeks and resigned as he was unsuited to the work. iirc.
 
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