gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
The apotheosis of whataboutery.
The British Monarchy
- Thread starter west didsblue
- Start date
TinFoilHat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Jan 2023
- Messages
- 39,111
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Interesting convo with a senator on MSNBC alluding to the sweaty nonce money laundering via 'official channels'
Silva Citizen
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 1,005
Actually it’s the height of couldntgiveafuckery
I totally get your sentiments regarding the royal family, as I've never been a fan of theirs, but if push comes to shove, I'd much rather have a head of state that is non political than an elected president.
We know what we are getting with the KIng, and family feuds and dysfunction aside, it's a stable monarchy which has to be the better option when compared to the alternative.
GIven the dreadful calibre of politicians at the moment, one of whom we would have to elect as our president, I'll stick with the King.
He didn't have to bullshit and gaslight us to get the gig.
I see Harry's security is up for review soon.
I'm sorry, but I can't stand him. Or his wife.
I trust and hope that no money from the taxpayer will be spent on this odious little ginger twat's inflated opinion of himself.
Stay in California and live your Flight to Freedom instead of prancing around on TV shows and paid for award ceremonies like you matter.
The only reason some people are still interested in you is because of what you are, not who the person you actually are. Related to royalty. And that's it.
Rant over, need to lie down.
I'm sorry, but I can't stand him. Or his wife.
I trust and hope that no money from the taxpayer will be spent on this odious little ginger twat's inflated opinion of himself.
Stay in California and live your Flight to Freedom instead of prancing around on TV shows and paid for award ceremonies like you matter.
The only reason some people are still interested in you is because of what you are, not who the person you actually are. Related to royalty. And that's it.
Rant over, need to lie down.
Last edited:
Raised by an adulterer, and born to mum lost in his childhood, with a grandma who paid hush money for an uncle accused of child abuse, to an aunt who engaged in multiple affairs and a grandfather who did the same, and a great uncle who frequented children's homes to give 'outings' to vulnerable young boys. Personally, I think he has done rather well to be a decent human being against that shoddy, sordid backdrop.
And so has William. Who is a much more rounded individual from what I've seen.
And Harry is a lost vindictive little boy, who the RF covered up for. For years.
So they have both worked out reasonably well then, despite their family?
Royal Family cover-ups are the norm are they not?
He is vindictive for walking away? I haven't heard anything from him that suggests he is that.
I haven't heard anything from William that suggests anything either.
What we know are the stories the press wish to tell us. You believe them or you don't, but they will always be on the side of the establishment because it earns them money.
I don't think Harry has worked out "reasonably well" at all. I see a vindictive little man who believed his own hype. As for his wife and her family....absolute bloody car crash, the lot of them.
Anyway, I take it you agree with taxpayers financing his need for UK security then?
East Level 2
Well-Known Member
He upsets Daily Mail readers. That's a positive surely.
BlueHammer85
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 40,888
He can not legally finance his own security that can carry firearms otherwise he would.
Your hatred on him is rather embarrassing and straight out the Gb news gossip columns.
What you see and what is reality seem to be two different things. It does not surprise me because the manipulation by the British media is very powerful indeed. Here are just a few headlines to ponder: same behaviour, entirely different reporting.
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. Entertainment, Social Issues
www.boredpanda.com
I don't believe that ANY member of the Royal Family should have taxpayer funded security.
Imagine a world where the taxpayer believes that it is perfectly okay to provide palatial homes to a family, and give them swathes of land from which they can create immense wealth, as well as the wealth bestowed upon them through birth, and to charge them peppercorn rents on those palaces, AND to fund their private security. At the dawn of time, this outcome would be considered preposterous.
I understand that there are legal issues in private security being armed, so it may not be as simple as you suggest. Papers like the Daily Mail would have him take the walk of shame, cap in hand, offering profuse apologies to the nation while his wife walks barefoot over hot coals to atone for the sins that nobody can actually describe. WEIRD.
Last edited:
stonerblue
Well-Known Member
No, he simply had to be born. And as for not getting involved in politics...
The Light Was Yellow Sir
Well-Known Member
Those headlines are quite staggering. Sadly, not surprising, but staggering, nonetheless.What you see and what is reality seem to be two different things. It does not surprise me because the manipulation by the British media is very powerful indeed. Here are just a few headlines to ponder: same behaviour, entirely different reporting.
As I said, the press will protect the establishment because it is profitable for them.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. Entertainment, Social Issues
I don't believe that ANY member of the Royal Family should have taxpayer funded security.
Imagine a world where the taxpayer believes that it is perfectly okay to provide palatial homes to a family, and give them swathes of land from which they can create immense wealth, as well as the wealth bestowed upon them through birth, and to charge them peppercorn rents on those palaces, AND to fund their private security. At the dawn of time, this outcome would be considered preposterous.
I understand that there are legal issues in private security being armed, so it may not be as simple as you suggest. Papers like the Daily Mail would have him take the walk of shame, cap in hand, offering profuse apologies to the nation while his wife walks barefoot over hot coals to atone for the sins that nobody can actually describe. WEIRD.
For a woman hardly anyone in this country has ever met, there seem to be a lot of people who’d have her treated like Lady Jane Grey…
TinFoilHat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Jan 2023
- Messages
- 39,111
- Team supported
- Manchester City
I'll be interested to see how Willy acts when he takes to the throne. If his farther has his grannies genes he'll be 70 odd to.
Her sin was to be non white. “How brown will this baby be?”What you see and what is reality seem to be two different things. It does not surprise me because the manipulation by the British media is very powerful indeed. Here are just a few headlines to ponder: same behaviour, entirely different reporting.
As I said, the press will protect the establishment because it is profitable for them.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. Entertainment, Social Issues
I don't believe that ANY member of the Royal Family should have taxpayer funded security.
Imagine a world where the taxpayer believes that it is perfectly okay to provide palatial homes to a family, and give them swathes of land from which they can create immense wealth, as well as the wealth bestowed upon them through birth, and to charge them peppercorn rents on those palaces, AND to fund their private security. At the dawn of time, this outcome would be considered preposterous.
I understand that there are legal issues in private security being armed, so it may not be as simple as you suggest. Papers like the Daily Mail would have him take the walk of shame, cap in hand, offering profuse apologies to the nation while his wife walks barefoot over hot coals to atone for the sins that nobody can actually describe. WEIRD.