He does dodge questions that don't suit him Teribus. Sometimes he even admits it ~ "That is a question for another day," he responded to my, imo, perfectly reasonable question as to why it is OK for him to 'own' a pair of socks or a pussycat or a car or a house, but it is immoral/unacceptable/villainous for the Queen to 'own' any land or property; so at what point of Hegelian shift from quantative to qualitative does ownership of property, or anything else, acquire the above-mentioned negative attributes?
I daresay I shall wait a while for answers, as he {& pete & all the pathetic leftipoos} get ever more desperate in attempts to find defences for their fatuities, which have little appeal to most posters on this thread, or, as we know, to 80% of respondents to a recent survey.