BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations

Subject: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 06:34 AM

Apart from the weather, this promises to be a wonderful celebration of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee. There are so many events to choose from!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 08:24 AM

We're all looking forward to the events planned in our village Bonzo. A marquee is being used in the vicar's garden for sedate old people's 'teas' then whisked away to the village green for more rumbustious things on Monday (beer tent and hog roast, dog show and children's races - whoopee!) A litle decorated horse-drawn trap will arrive with two excited children dressed as Her Maj and Prince Philip. She'll sit on a little throne and be 'crowned', then all the children will receive a special engraved medal on a ribbon and a waving flag. The church bells are scheduled to ring on cue and we'll sing the National Anthem. Then dancing and a bouncy castle, ice creams and a maypole. In fact, the epitomy of England at its best. I can't wait!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Beer
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 08:31 AM

Have a great celebration.
Adrien

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 08:45 AM

I haven't started drinking the beer yet, but as you can see, I can't spell 'little' or 'epitome'!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: alanabit
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 10:35 AM

I wish you good weather and a good time. I would not want to spoil anyone's party. My heroes are more Jack Cade, Wat Tyler and Tony Benn... No wish to rain on anyone else's parade though. Each to his or her own!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 12:45 PM

Enjoy! I may have a boo at some of the proceedings. The concert sounds like it might be okay... >;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 01:24 PM

Have just made 4 dozen sausage rolls and 2 large fruit cakes. The weather forecast doesn't look too cracky does it?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 01:59 PM

The Queen is revoltingly rich yet her hubbie pulls in over three hundred grand of public money per annum. What's up with you lot?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 02:13 PM

The grand affair will bring in tourists and will make merchants and hoteliers and employees of all entities concerned happy. The money brought in will far exceed the cost of the Monarchy.

The Queen is caretaker of many of UK's historical and artistic holdings. Dispersing her wealth would serve no purpose except destruction of what has become a grand tradition.

Echoing Beer, "Have a grest celebration."

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 02:15 PM

Can't speak for the other people, but for me, it's all about our local community getting together for a lovely weekend of fun and social events. It's also about pride in our country and looking back over the last sixty years with a bit of nostalgia. I feel the Queen has served us well. But I do realise that not everyone feels the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 04:04 PM

There's no room for extra tourists on a bank holiday. In any case, the tourist dough the royal parasites allegedly bring in is open to severe doubt. File under Received Wisdom. The Queen is not the caretaker of many of the UK's historical and artistic holdings. She and her ancestors stole them. A rich landowner spotted a tramp in his field. He went up to him and ordered him to get off his land.

"And how did you come by this land?" asked the tramp.

"Why, my ancestors fought for it!"

The tramp, taking off his jacket, said, "All right then. Come on, I'll fight you for it now!"

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Janie
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 04:10 PM

It is difficult for this 10th generation American to comprehend the significance of the long tradition of monarchy and what it may symbolize, positive and negative,to those of you raised in countries with that tradition. One of the reasons I so enjoy Mudcat is the opportunity to read and learn from threads such as this might develop into.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 04:11 PM

Stole them from whom, Steve? I think Geronimo and Chief Seattle and one or two others might have had something to say about 'stolen' land.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 04:21 PM

What do you mean, stole them from whom? Who made that land they own? Do you really think it's right for one person to own vast tracts of land, much of which she never visits, or great works of art that we are not allowed to see, or, at best, have to pay to see? Who was that great art made for? For the world's richest woman to hold as "investments"?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 04:27 PM

Well... this has been done to death on many previous threads. Love or hate "the monarchy", Beth is one cool old broad and I salute her on her special day. Ya wanna bitch and moan about the royals and what you don't understand about what they actually do, start another thread or post to the many other threads of carping and misunderstanding. This thread is about the party. If you don't wanna attend the party... don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Beer
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 05:07 PM

Well said Gnu. I knew it wouldn't take long before someone came in and tried to spoil the party. How sad.
ad.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 06:43 PM

Tuff tittie. I will invade your obsequious, sycophantic thread if I like, just like people invade my threads. That's the interwebbie thingie for ye! Now get off yer knees and fight the good fight against inherited privilege! You wouldn't defend anyone else getting the level of state benefits they get! And sod the party! It's just the Tories hoping we'll forget!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 06:56 PM

The miserable sod's just exhibiting the usual malicious envy of anybody with a bit more dosh.

If he'd inherited a couple of hundred grand his attitude would be completely different.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 07:06 PM

And how do you know I haven't? And why on earth would I be envious of a bunch of regally-inbred dimwits who all had the best education available on the planet yet couldn't be raised above the level of the seriously mediocre?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 07:10 PM

I doubt anyone would leave him a penny with that attitude.

"obsequious, sycophantic"??? Off with his head! Heheheheheee.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 07:11 PM

Seems to me the different parts of the country are getting more and more different. I'm in the Scottish Borders and there is complete indifference as far as the jubilee goes. I don't know of any events - though there may in fact be some but if there are it is very low key. I've just been to an annual village fete today and I don't think I heard the jubilee being mentioned once. The ailses in Sainsbury's are bedecked with union flags. That seems to be the only difference!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 07:12 PM

Which just shows how little you really know about any of them.

But you would like to be right to justify your totally unreasoning hatred of people who have done you absolutely no harm.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 07:28 PM

Oh-oh... Don... easy... can o' worms lad.

Please let's just stick to the celebration? I mean, she did a pretty good job given the job. Wish I has her resumé next time I applied for a job at Walmart. Do greeters get to wear a crown? I suppose carrying a scepter is out?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 07:33 PM

I've already given you my reasons. Now give me your reasons for supporting these parasites who are only there because millions died in wars to keep this country from becoming a fascist state but whose descendants are routinely shat on by the "upper classes" that the royals represent. Give me your reasons as to why the world's richest family receive £32 million per annum from taxpayers. Tell me why you are so fond of a family whose numero uno heir to the throne was purportedly shagging his mistress on his stag night before marrying Diana next day. Tell me what you suppose Phil The Greek does for the third of a million he gets from us every year. This lot are the archetypal piss-takers, Don!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 07:35 PM

The only reason for thinking she's done a pretty good job (pretty part-time too, I should add) is that she tends to keep her gob shut. Very sensible, considering her limited intellect. If only her number one son would follow suit.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 07:59 PM

",,,these parasites who are only there because millions died in wars to keep this country from becoming a fascist state ..."

You mean the Nazis would have got rid of them? And a lot of the rest of us as well. No doubt the British Reich would have been some kind of republic.

Seems to me the idea of the Jubilee is primarily to celebrate the rest of us who've been around over the past sixty years, and we deserve it.

I get irritated at the way people talk about all this as if somehow the royal stuff was imposed on us by the royals as individuals. They're only there doing it because that is what people actually want. It's a kind of family of public slaves, very comfortable slaves, that's true, but totally owned by us, there to perform for us.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 08:23 PM

People actually want hanging, flogging, caning, conscription, sending the blackies back to Bongo-Bongo Land and a dozen other desirable things. Yeah, give the people what they bloody want!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 08:30 PM

What don't you understand about start YER OWN FUCKIN THREAD?

Everyone who posts to this thread not in celebration of this occasion is simply showing their true colours... ignorance and ill manners. Seriously, your asses shine bright red. Too bad your intelligence is so dim in comparison.

There have been threads in the past for your discussions. You can recall one. You can start your own if you are not able to do a simple filter search for past threads. But, again, seriously, posting your shite to this thread only demonstrates you are an ass.

You have a right to your opinion and protest but THIS is not your parade. Go march your goose step somewhere else.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 08:41 PM

Don't be so silly. No thread may be declared sacrosanct by you or anyone else. A large minority of people in this country vehemently oppose the royal parasites. You don't get to keep a thread pure just because the old bugger has managed to preserve herself well beyond her use-by date. I dare say that any thread opposing the royals would be rapidly invaded by a bunch of royal sucker-upperers.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 08:43 PM

Incidentally:

...start YER OWN FUCKIN THREAD?

Everyone who posts to this thread not in celebration of this occasion is simply showing their true colours... ignorance and ill manners. Seriously, your asses shine bright red.

Your lack of irony is amazing!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Beer
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 09:27 PM

Steve,
I don't know you nor do i know how old you are. But here is a question. have you ever served your Country? Did you know that your Queen did.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: ChanteyLass
Date: 02 Jun 12 - 09:51 PM

Many people will enjoy these celebrations. I hope the weather is better than predicted!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 02:31 AM

What do you mean, stole them from whom? Who made that land they own? Do you really think it's right for one person to own vast tracts of land, much of which she never visits, or great works of art that we are not allowed to see, or, at best, have to pay to see? Who was that great art made for? For the world's richest woman to hold as "investments"?

Yes yes, there there, Steve!: we all know that Property Is Theft, as Marx didn't say {it was Proudhon IIRC}.

So did you "steal" YOUR house? YOUR watch? YOUR car? YOUR ties and shirts and trousers? then, eh?

Oh, grow up...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Dead Horse
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 03:25 AM

That pratt Shaw is a troll and gives socialism a bad name.
Ignore the little shite.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Will Fly
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 05:04 AM

What few people know is that the Queen is actually my agent. Once every 25 years or so I get an extra gig because of her - like today's lunchtime gig in my local.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 05:14 AM

Who can object to the river pageant?
1000 craft. Centuries of maritime tradition.
I wish I could see it live, but I will enjoy the broadcasts.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 05:14 AM

Glaze your arses and drink a toast to the queer old dean.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 05:29 AM

Ah, royalists are such pleasant charmers! 'Twas ever thus. I shall certainly raise a glass ce soir to go with my roast chicken (not coronation), but it will be something French or Italian, nothing fermented in a monarchy for me today! Have a nice day and don't let the gale-lashed bunting strangle you!

Interesting post, Metro The Goldwyn Mayer, which I'd love to tear you to shreds on in what passes for debate round here, but why spoil a beautiful, uncritical day!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: banjoman
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 06:25 AM

I agree with steve shaw and a lot of what he says. I made my position clear in the thread in the music section asking for songs for the jubilee.Please read

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Megan L
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 06:30 AM

That is the wonderful thing about a free country you are free to give your opinion and everyone else is free to ignore it.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 06:32 AM

You think you are being funny about my name, Herr Schutzstaffel: but, in fact, Louis B Mayer, despite difference in spelling the Californian branch of my family uses, was my first cousin twice removed, i.e. my paternal grandfather's first cousin. So, as Private Eye wouldn't say ~~ Yes relation.

I am not an out-and-out royalist BTW, e.g. I think HM's sister Margaret was a snobbish spiteful obnoxious person. But I am a great believer in the principles of "Ain't broke, don't fix"; "Baby'n'bathwater"; Unintended Consequences...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 06:57 AM

Well, at Holy Communion this morning we said the special Jubilee Prayer and sang the National Anthem, and we all glowed with pride. I'm sorry that Steve and others don't share this feeling, but of course they have a perfect right to express their opinions. However, need they be so vituperative and insulting, not to mention abusive when posting? Such enormous anger and hate seem to me indicative of a rather unbalanced personality. I can't see how us villagers waving our flags and having fun can possibly do them any harm.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 07:15 AM

... and furthermore, Steve; seriously, as you seem to have seen some point in my previous post: on the Hegelian principle that there is a sort of balancing point at which a quantative difference becomes a qualitative one, at what precise point would you undertake to defend an assertion that so much ownership of property, as distinct from your ownership of your own socks & pussycat, could be convincingly denounced as unacceptable? And why?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 07:27 AM

I'm sorry that Steve and others don't share this feeling, but of course they have a perfect right to express their opinions. However, need they be so vituperative and insulting, not to mention abusive when posting?

Sadly, Eliza, 'tis the wrong target. 'Tis the royalists on this thread who have reserved for themselves the monopoly over vituperation and insults, thus:

That pratt Shaw is a troll and gives socialism a bad name.
Ignore the little shite.

What don't you understand about start YER OWN FUCKIN THREAD?

Everyone who posts to this thread not in celebration of this occasion is simply showing their true colours... ignorance and ill manners. Seriously, your asses shine bright red. Too bad your intelligence is so dim in comparison... But, again, seriously, posting your shite to this thread only demonstrates you are an ass... Go march your goose step somewhere else.

The miserable sod's just exhibiting the usual malicious envy of anybody with a bit more dosh.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 07:29 AM

It's for another day, MtheGM. I didn't mean to take the Mick out of your name, by the way. Shall I call you "the" from now on, to be safe?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 08:17 AM

No, OK Steve ~ didn't take it as Mickey-taking in any unacceptable way: just that people often make the connection in a facetious tone without realising there really is a connection & the initials are not purely adventitious.

I have endeavoured to avoid the merely vituperative and to answer your points with reason.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: theleveller
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 08:21 AM

Wonderful jubilee protest! Nice one!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/republiccampaign/sets/72157630025677898

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: BrendanB
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 08:24 AM

I love the Jubilee, we have got two gigs because of it! Monday in a pub, which is good because the weather forecast is not great and Tuesday at a village barbecue party for which we are praying for good weather. I was in our local town yesterday which is all buntinged up and everyone was being very jolly, doesn't seem like a bad thing to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 08:32 AM

Isn't God supposed to be the ultimate arbiter in all this? What are you supposed to believe about the 'Divine Right of Kings (Queens?)' if you don't believe in God?

God save the Queen! From what, exactly?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 09:06 AM

I have endeavoured to avoid the merely vituperative and to answer your points with reason.

Then, the, you have signally failed, as you've just called me "Steve-Fatgob" in a thread not unrelated to this!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 09:09 AM

Funny you should mention God, Shimrod. I was just thinking about how these here royalists react to criticism of their beloved monarch in exactly the same way as religionists react when their God is attacked. Interesting.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 09:13 AM

Excellent pics, leveller. I wonder how much coverage the Beeb will give that protest on the evening news. Huh.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Megan L
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 09:53 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 09:57 AM

My Dear Mr. Shaw;

Have you any idea how boring it is to have to put up with these rants. Why not leave of whingeing for a day and allow those who enjoy such things to just have a pleasant day.
Personally, I am weary of the politics of resentment..lighten up and enjoy.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 10:11 AM

All I have to say to you, Mr Hilo, is why aren't you watching telly? Let us republicans rant miserably in peace on our own for a couple of hours just for once!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 10:22 AM

I rather liked what David Mitchell wrote about this in today's Observer. The Queen's jubilee should be a time of rejoicing for our spoilsports

'...making our weird cartoonish monarchy the focus for a national knees-up is so cleverly inclusive: it gives the curmudgeons a role. Peter Wilby moaned that: "At times like this, republicans risk being portrayed as killjoys and spoilsports." But he's wrong. It's the other way round: at times like this killjoys and spoilsports get to be portrayed as republicans. The Queen's existence means that a flabby "Bah humbug!" emotion is given a rational constitutional backbone and transformed into a credible opinion.'

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 10:26 AM

Oh, please dp rant on your own..in peace..it would be such a pleasant change.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Will Fly
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 10:29 AM

Well, our jubilee Sunday lunchtime gig went down a storm - and my jazz duo is booked in my local for a similar lunchtime gig on the 1st Sunday of every month. So thanks, Queenie - or should I say, thanks, circumstance...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 10:48 AM

#bbcjubilee Nice weather for republicans on the Themes; my poem on monarchism "AFTER PSALM 118:9 AND MATTHEW 4:8-10": http://www.myspace.com/walkaboutsverse/blog/454825721

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 10:51 AM

Anyone know why HiLo isn't in front of the telly still? Yep, I read David Mitchell too. He don't half burble on. His missus-to-be was good on Question Time I thought. Good card-player too.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 11:15 AM

Despite the dull weather (above), though, the Themes flotilla is providing a true representation of the revolting inequality in our nation.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bainbo
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 11:21 AM

My favourite comment has been from an American lady who spoke to BBC radio as she queued up along the side of the Thames this morning. She was understandably excited at the prospect of the pageantry, and chortled: "It's going to be just like the Fourth of July."

Now, I'm not a great one on history, but isn't the Fourth of July precisely a celebration of getting rid of all this flummery?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Megan L
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 11:23 AM

Well I would offer a celbratory plate of fish and chips but there seems to be enough chips on some shoulders its no wonder the poor wee things are grumpy carrying all that weight around all the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bainbo
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 11:30 AM

Please don't take from my comment above that I'm anti- all of this. I feel, as another commentator has said, like someone who isn't a sports fan feels during the build-up to a big game. I'm aware it's happening, it just doesn't really affect me.

I've been listening to it on the radio, after all, and my other favourite comment was from a little girl at a street party in Scotland. Asked how long the Queen had been on the throne, she answered, very slowly, clearly, and confidently: "Eight. Hundred. Years."

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 11:36 AM

...fancy a Scottish lass forgetting Cromwell, Bainbo!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 11:45 AM

isn't the Fourth of July precisely a celebration of getting rid of all this flummery?" - and replacing it by an equivalent display of flummery...

It really doesn't involve a significant change in some ways. Except that people seem to take it all much more seriously than they do with the royal version.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 12:18 PM

What was the Beeb doing employing a commenator so pig-ignorant as to announce the arrival of "Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth II"? That really was what he said. I hope they confiscate his mic and place it elsewhere.

~M~

In case any foreigners reading this may be puzzled {all true Brits will have got the point already, apart maybe from such as Fatgob*}, the Queen is not a Royal Highness, but, above all those, is Her Majesty: now that her mother is dead, the only person in the nation at present entitled to be so-called.

*[a term of affectionate rivalry, of course, not abuse, Herr Schutzstaffel!]

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 12:38 PM

Good God, typical nit-picking royalist! Perhaps it was a deliberate instance of lese-majesty from a closet Beeb republican...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 12:40 PM

...or mebbe he did it just to annoy you, the.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 12:43 PM

As the Beatles put it:

Her Majesty's a pretty nice girl
But she doesn't have a lot to say
Her Majesty's a pretty nice girl
But she changes from day to day

I want to tell her that I love her a lot
But I gotta get a bellyful of wine
Her Majesty's a pretty nice girl
Someday I'm going to make her mine, oh yeah
Someday I'm going to make her mine

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 12:55 PM

Someday I'm going to make her mine, oh yeah

Does that mean that McCartney's after shagging her post-gig tomorrow?? Is she a groupie then???

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 12:59 PM

Gawd Bless her.

No seriously...

The alternative is someone who WANTS to be the big cheese. Every Prime Minister since and including Churchill has had this someone to bounce things off each week, and considering it can get a bit lonely at the top, I am convinced her approach has helped in ways someone who campaigns to be a President could only dream of.

A bit like the Aussies who never become a Republic for that very reason, cynicism of whoever would want to replace her.

Chippy rants get a bit boring after a time, don't you think? History got her there and me here, and you down there, oik.... I don't apologise for my Dad getting pissed one night in, say, 1946, and I don't apologise for the Empire. Far easier than being a miserable sod. I only apologise for what I personally do. I don't expect any different from our institutions. She isn't the Monarch in any real sense, and we are a constitutional democracy, (although paradoxically without a constitution.) Royal assent of law is a ceremony not a fact.

You see, there are people who get drawn to tradition. Some enthusiasts of tradition get together in pubs and sing traditional songs, their sense of tradition being so strong. Folkies, I believe they are called....

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 01:00 PM

#bbcjubilee What about the health and safety of the Philharmonic singers - all miked-up in the wet?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 01:04 PM

...singing "Rule Brittania" - with all due respect for indigenes, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 01:19 PM

"Isn't God supposed to be the ultimate arbiter in all this?" No that all ended when James VII & II first fled the English throne because of the Williamite invasion and then was branded a traitor and booted of the Scottish throne by the Scottish Parliament. Since then the monarchs have accepted the idea, probably unwillingly at first, of the consitutional monarchy. Bonnie Prince Charlie and his father before him unsuccesfully tried to turn the clock back to rule by divine right.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 01:40 PM

...long to rain over us.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 01:43 PM

SS ~~ let me repeat what I said to you above:

'I am not an out-and-out royalist BTW, e.g. I think HM's sister Margaret was a snobbish spiteful obnoxious person. But I am a great believer in the principles of "Ain't broke, don't fix"; "Baby'n'bathwater"; Unintended Consequences...'

So you can stop calling me a royalist tout court, if you wouldn't mind ~~ or even if you would.

Regards

the


For general consideration ~~ Something I observed that I don't recall to have seen before ~ or have I just missed it? Prince Philip & Prince Charles wore their Royal Navy uniforms, with rank insignia at bottom of sleeves, respectively Admiral of the Fleet and Admiral. But on the shoulders they carried also their army rank insignia, Field Marshal/General. This is surely unusual: or are there precedents? A bit confusing imo...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 02:11 PM

Top congratulations are due the pageant master and his staff for a well-organized procession on the Thames.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Paul Burke
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 02:58 PM

Here's an offer to you Yanks- Liz has about four years to go before beating Victoria as longest raining (sic) monarch. That should take us to the end of Obama's second term. Then you give him to us as first President as an extension of the old lend lease program- ok he ain't by any means perfect, but a lot better than any of our homegrown alternatives- especially New Age Charlie. And his Dad was a Kenyan, which is of course where Liz was up a tree when she found out she was queen.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 04:16 PM

...I was surprised that the Beeb showed, via Charles, footage of her return flight from Kenya, upon her father's death - looking most happy with herself.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 05:45 PM

""Wonderful jubilee protest! Nice one!""

Yeah! Wonderful indeed!

A million lining the Thames on both banks and cheering themselves hoarse.

One hundred or so in an otherwise deserted corner, protesting loudly to a couple of bored journalists and a wet dog.

Guess we won't be seeing your desired Soviet Socialist Republic here anytime soon.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 05:58 PM

""I hope they confiscate his mic and place it elsewhere.""

I noticed that and a couple of other blunders Mike.

Maybe next time they'll have the sense to call on a Dimbleby (David or Jonathan, either would do the job), they have the pedigree for commentary on State Occasions.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 06:05 PM

"...her return flight from Kenya, upon her father's death - looking most happy with herself. "

Would this be the picture you mean, walkabouts? "first picture of the Queen just hours after taking the throne " - "looking most happy with herself" doesn't really seem the right way to put it...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: number 6
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 06:07 PM

My wife made a comment/question today ... whilst watching some of this Jubilee 'stuff' ... and that comment/question was .. Phil and Liz are such good looking couple, how could they produce such homely looking offspring.

anyway ... personally I don't give a rat's ass about the royal household. But I must say 'jubilee' is a such a beautiful word.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 07:51 PM

Prince Philip & Prince Charles wore their Royal Navy uniforms, with rank insignia at bottom of sleeves

Something deep down inside me detects an appropriateness in this sentence I can't quite put my finger on...

the, I'm going to have to stick permanently with that small t, even at the start of a sentence, which grates somewhat. Reason being that I call The Edge "The", so the only way I'll be able to tell you apart is by that initial letter. I hope you don't mind being littler than he.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 07:56 PM

Maybe next time they'll have the sense to call on a Dimbleby (David or Jonathan, either would do the job), they have the pedigree for commentary on State Occasions.

Interesting interpretation of "pedigree" there, Don. Whilst I'm an aficionado of the elder Bumblebee in particular, I still prefer the term "nepotism" in this case... Bring back that fanatical, right-wing, royalist sycophant Cliff Michelmore, say I!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 08:18 PM

I missed the Thames deal. Watched the first of a three part (one hour each) series about her and what she does and why she does it. She does what no one else can do. She DOES fill a valuable position and provides a vauable service(s). After she goes... who knows? I assume it will continue, but I just don't see Charles doing the same job. If he does, I assume it will just be for a short time... for tradition.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 08:22 PM

She does what no one else can do.

Do expand.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 03 Jun 12 - 08:32 PM

Watch the shows, Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 05:02 AM

I was forced to watch some by dint of living in a household that is less than solidly republican. I see that she can stand up for quite a while (admittedly, not bad for an advanced wrinkly such as she, though not a unique skill by a long chalk) and do funny little waves. I imagine she can also say "Hellay, and what do you do?" when prompted. She can sit in a big room and pat people on the shoulder with a sword. She can giggle with call-me Dave and frown at Brown. Let's face it, gnu. Her "job" generally consists of turning up to places via the finest forms of transport available on the planet. Once there, she does next to nothing except "be an icon." To suggest that no-one else could do these things, is, well, a trifle fanciful to say the least. By far the most successful aspect of her job is that she keeps her trap shut. And, unlike her feckless son Big-ears, she manages not to bob up and down like a bloody idiot in the view of billions of people during the Sailor's Hornpipe. You see, even I am capable of giving her some credit.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Jack Campin
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 05:39 AM

BBC report on the great Scottish ho-hum:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-18317092

I think that gets it about right. There isn't a lot of hostility to the Royals in Scotland but there is even less enthusiasm for them. I have seen no private house with bunting or a flag, and outdoor parties at the weekend were mostly ones that were going to happen anyway (like the Meadows Festival in Edinburgh or the children's gala in the village next to mine, both events that have taken place annually for decades).

And we unpatriotic sods had a great sunny day while God was pissing on London. So there.

Apparently you can get bunting printed with little guillotine motifs.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: theleveller
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 05:55 AM

"Guess we won't be seeing your desired Soviet Socialist Republic here anytime soon.
"

As usual, Don, you have no fucking idea do you? Moron!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 08:55 AM

You tell him Wolfie!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 09:06 AM

We only want an English Socialist Republic - imperialism is evil.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 09:13 AM

...apart from some local government, all any citizen of our world needs is their own nation and the United Nations: no Commonwealth, G20, EU...nor and other such club.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 10:08 AM

I think that Ms Piggy has been a wise and stabilising influence at times of constitutional crisis. The idea of hereditary rule as such rather grates, and the way in which the crown as such (as distinct from the current holder) amassed such landholdings also rather grates (as do the Inclosure Acts) but given that the Crown is now a constitutional monarchy I would have thought that work expenses should be paid by the employer (that is to say the state rather than the crown).

I'm not a rabid royalist, but I'm inclined to think that the present incumbent is better than any present revolutionary choices, and I thing that Big-Ears often talks a lot of sense. Both seem very replete with a sense of duty, and Phil the Greek has held down a gruelling schedule of official duties well past retirement age (and his sense of humour has I think suffered from an unnecessarily hostile press).

I don't want to jump up and down and celebrate being a peasant under a master's lash but I wouldn't lead the revolution against the monarchy. Now against the present bunch of "elected" Etonians, that's another matter!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 10:32 AM

"Big-Ears", Richard, could surely join the Greens.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 01:04 PM

I started wondering why Bozo starts threads like this (obvious answers, related to his general character, on a postcard, please)?

Of course, it goes without saying, that he likes winding up Lefties.

But I also suspect that he's hoping that Her Maj reads this, will be mightily impressed by his slavish loyalty, instruct MI5 to discover his identity (using Top Secret software) and award him a knighthood and a million pounds!

Dream on, Bozo!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 01:12 PM

Lefties can now go back to their hutch.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: number 6
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 01:33 PM

I think it's about time we finally stepped out of the 18th century in regards to monarchy, politiks, and economic systems and move onto the 21st century ... if we don't, we'll surely become extinct.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 01:35 PM

Our political stance on most matters boils-down to how much inequality we accept - I, frankly, find present levels (of which the monarchy is symbolic) revoloting.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,grumpy
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 03:33 PM

If the monarchy disappeared tonight would our lives be any different tomorrow morning? I think not. I'd go for Brian Clough's head on the stamps of maybe Eddie Izzard's.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 03:48 PM

""Our political stance on most matters boils-down to how much inequality we accept - I, frankly, find present levels (of which the monarchy is symbolic) revoloting.""

I bet your attitude (and that of several others here) would bloody soon change if a hitherto unknown relative died and left you a mansion, a title and a couple of million quid.

That wouldn't be quite so ""revoloting"" I suspect.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bainbo
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 04:16 PM

Concert's about to start, featuring Kylie Minogue, Robbie Williams, and Gary Barlow.

I think I'm with the Duke of Edinburgh on this. I might be inclined to suddely claim a debilitating illness as I was about to sit down for it, as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 05:14 PM

"Revolting" sorry, Don. But you're also mistaken: I'm content with a council flat, "WalkaboutsVerse" as my title!, and I never buy lottery tickets - which I have described in such verse as "An Opium" http://walkaboutsverse.blogspot.co.uk/2010/11/walkaboutsverse-138-of-230.html

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 06:50 PM

Look abroad, including that most ancient of republics acrossthe Atlantic, and consider whether there is any reason at all to imagine that getting rid of the hereditary monarchy would do anything whatsoever to make us a more equal society.

It's a pretty ridiculous system, true enough, but that's its best quality. One person at the heart of it who seems to be fully aware of this is that amiable eccentric Prince Charles, who generates such rage from so many people. It's something that seems to unite many ardent monarchists and fervent republicans.

I think Charles would make an enjoyable public figure as King. Prince William I fear would be rather a bore.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jun 12 - 06:54 PM

So, you would refuse an inheritance if it came your way? Pardon me if I find that less than credible.

I too ignore the lottery. Not doing it gives me no chance of winning, as opposed to doing it, which is roughly the same, and £1 per non chance seems over pricey.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 04:32 AM

"I bet your attitude (and that of several others here) would bloody soon change if a hitherto unknown relative died and left you a mansion, a title and a couple of million quid."

Not sure that it would change me all that much, Don. The couple of million quid would provide me with more choices - but I don't think that it would change my basic outlook on life. After all, what would I spend it on? I've reached a stage in my life where I begin to value possessions less and less. This, by the way, is not sanctimonious bullshit - it's what I really think. Until recently I had a reasonably well paid job (and no dependants} and many of the possessions that I acquired then have become a bit of an encumbrance now.

I'm retired now and the other day I was sat on the bus, idly watching the world go by, and was thinking that perhaps, at this stage in my life, I'm as rich as anyone needs to be. After all I've got reasonable health (for now, at least), I've got a roof over my head, enough money to live on, friends, interests, loads of free time (which allows me to gaze idly out of bus windows) and a free bus pass! I have had my share of disappointments in my life - but money wouldn't have put them right. I think that I'm pretty rich right now - and no-one really needs to be much richer.

Mind you, a constant theme, and a constant cause of concern, which I see whenever I look out of any sort of window, is the on-going destruction of my environment - and everyone else's environment. It is the blind pursuit of wealth which has led to this on-going and ceaseless destruction.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Will Fly
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 05:30 AM

Shimrod - you've more or less described my own attitudes at the moment. I have no mortgage or rent to pay, reasonable health, a modest pension which allows me to indulge my propensities for the odd guitar, old American railroad watches and bottles of wine. I've also got lots of free time and few worries other than hoping that life for my son and my grandchildren goes well in the future - and, like you, that the greedy bloody property developers don't get to concrete over the whole of Sussex...

I sat under the sun parasol in the back garden the other day, reading the paper, eating a Danish, drinking a coffee and enjoying the sunshine and the flowers waving in a light breeze. I thought to myself, "Well, this is what I worked 47 years for." Too bloody right, BUT - who needs more? I've never understood the need for acquiring masses of money, power and influence. What drives a man like, say, R. Murdoch to want to acquire more and more - all the world's newspapers, all the world's media?

A number of recent studies appear to show that the biggest cause of dissension in a country is not inequality but gross inequality, which we appear to be moving towards year by year. I'm with Richard in that a hereditary head of state, such as we have now, seems a reasonable figurehead to represent the country. But I prefer a monarchy in the Dutch style - one where Liz or Charlie could cycle off to the corner shop for a packet of fags and the paper - rather than one where huge amounts of wealth are involved. And if I get the usual argument that the Monarchy is worth its weight in tourism and exports, etc., I invariably reply, "Show me the balance sheet" - which no-one can. If people say that thousands of tourists come to London because of the manifestations of royalty, I reply that currently, by far the most popular tourist capital in Europe is Berlin.

And as for Charles becoming King - if he does so he'll have to stop his current proselytising and interfering in matters of government - unconstitutional as it is.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 05:57 AM

Will Fly and Shimrod, my feelings exactly! I have 'enough' and to me, that's all anyone can ask for or need. Folk who constantly feel envy, and want more, wouldn't be satisfied if they were given millions. Happiness is internal, not linked to acquiring wealth. To me, any surplus-to-requirements money I may have (not much I have to say!) goes to help a very poor and needy family in Ivory Coast, and I'm proud to share what I have. The Queen to me represents Stability and Continuity, two very important yet hard to define qualities essential to our national welfare and peace. Change and transience are not always desirable, they need brakes sometimes, and the Monarchy is there to apply them. (Just my view, I know there are those who detest the Institution.)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 06:10 AM

This total guff about the royals bringing in tourist dough needs blowing out of the water once and for all. It is routinely parroted out as the received wisdom it truly is. It is so easy a thing to to say because it is entirely untestable, a bit like the existence of God. On the other hand, it isn't difficult to mutter fairly convincingly against it. For example, only one direct royal connection in the top 20 UK tourist attractions (Windsor Castle at a miserable no 17), and monarchless France pulling in almost three times as many tourists as the UK. If you really think tourists will stop coming if we did away with the royals, prove it!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 06:11 AM

Not only that, getting tourists in is a bloody lousy argument for keeping the royals going in any case.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: BrendanB
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 06:39 AM

Something very disturbing has just happened to me. I read Steve Shaw's last two posts and found myself nodding in agreement! On a happier note we did our jubilee pub gig yesterday and sold out of CDs at the end, result! (mostly to a large group of Germans, apparently they were part of a choir touring over here, good taste the Germans).
Off to play at a barbecue in a couple of hours - and it has started to cloud over, absolutely typical and I blame the Royal Family.
I also agree completely with Shimrod, Will Fly and Eliza (this is getting very worrying).

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 06:45 AM

Well, we had a session at The Falcon in Bude, courtesy of Bude Folk Festival, last night, which might explain why my posts may seem shorter today...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 07:02 AM

getting tourists in is a bloody lousy argument for keeping the royals going

Yes, that is no argument for keeping the monarchy.
It is just one of the counter arguments to complaints about the cost of it.

France has a few of advantages over UK for tourism.
UK is an island, is not on the route to anywhere else, and no Disney Land

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Jack Campin
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 07:29 AM

The UK has produced a lot more world-renowned serial killers than France has. And they make just as good a tourist attraction as royals. (The jobs have sometimes been combined, but Dennis Nilsen was a lot easier on the public purse than Henry VIII).

Jack the Ripper already has themed tours, but think of the other possibilities. Parades of white vans on Robert Black Day. Community garden- and cellar-digging parties to commemorate the Wests. A new dance introduced by celebrity singers for Bible John.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 08:30 AM

"So, you would refuse an inheritance if it came your way? Pardon me if I find that less than credible" (Don)...I'd use it to disseminate WalkaboutsVerse, which I believe to be the best way forward for humanity.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 09:49 AM

Having just heard his congratulations, #bbcjubilee If Obama doesn't want us to become a democratic republic, then he is surely a hypocrite.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 10:23 AM

I note an air of "we" want this or "we" want that.

Not sure who "we" are, so I suppose "we" are not amused.

Back to the title, Wonderful Jubilee Celebrations, I watched most of the concert last night and really enjoyed it. Some people of "an age" had problem singing as they used to whilst others managed it fine. No matter, this was not about musical perfection on the night, it was about wallowing in nostalgia and I certainly did. Wish I had made it down there, as I did many years ago for Live Aid.

A friend pointed out that in order to be over 65 and still be able to sing well, the evidence seems to be that you are either Welsh or blind. I'll go with that.

20,000 on The Mall, 100,000 lining nearby parks, a few billion across the commonwealth watching on the goggle box. mmm.. Sad day for the Trots it appears. Democracy being the only system I would, could or will defend, it looks like you and your shoulder chips are Billy No Mates then.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 10:54 AM

"Democracy being the only system I would, could or will defend" - so you can't like monarchism, then, Ian.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 10:55 AM

Call me Mr Cynical, but there's all this starchy pomp 'n' ceremony - and a pop concert? Nothing to do at all, I suppose, with getting the next generation on board the royalist train...? God, how easily we are taken in!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 11:39 AM

Ah Live Aid - I was in Pimlico Park London to see Tex Maniax in the afternoon, then to the Half Moon Putney in the evening to see The Clive Gregson Band - Clive Aid!!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 11:42 AM

so you can't like monarchism, then, Ian
I am sure he does.
We have a monarchy, and as good a democracy as any anywhere in the world WW, so what ever is your point?

Nothing to do at all, I suppose, with getting the next generation on board the royalist train...? God, how easily we are taken in!
No. Just you Steve.
It was hardly what would be chosen to get youth on board.

You two are not making much of a case.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 12:22 PM

The "queen", Keith, obviously didn't get her job through examination or votes; to repeat, as it happens, she and Charles Windsor are quite good public speakers but, even if not so good, they'd inherit the job anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 12:59 PM

Yo, WAV - nice to see you back.

You know, I really hate our country; thousands of years of history & heritage & the place is a rubbish strewn carboot free-for all with people waving their crappy plastic flags as the Torys carve it all up for the rich.

Not much cause for jubilation.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 01:11 PM

""Mind you, a constant theme, and a constant cause of concern, which I see whenever I look out of any sort of window, is the on-going destruction of my environment - and everyone else's environment. It is the blind pursuit of wealth which has led to this on-going and ceaseless destruction.""

And you conflate the existence of the Royal Family with that blind pursuit?

Another good look around you would, if you were to open both eyes and mind, lead you to the conclusion that most of those seekers of wealth are of the "Loadsamoney" persuasion, being the people who were most involved in the late eighties boom and bust, the lunatic escalation in property values, etc.

And they my friend were mostly common as muck climbers from the bottom of the heap, not Eton and Harrow upper class, which does rather spoil the illusion, wouldn't you say?

Pretty much all of them who succeeded are now among the bankers (with a capital W) who put us in the current position.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 01:12 PM

Hi Sean: they are just looking at that issue on the Beeb's "One Show" - more material wealth here than the 50s, but many more, sadly, want to emigrate.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 01:14 PM

WAV, er...yes.
Thank you for explaining that.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Jim McLean
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 01:27 PM

According to reports in the Scotish papers today there were 60 street parties in Scotland with 20 Orange order parades funded by the Glasgow Labour council.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 01:48 PM

I especially loved the way, during this display of unquestioning arse-licking unemployed people were hired by a private security company, made to work unpaid and sleep under London Bridge and then in a swamp the day after.

60 glorious years? Fuck off.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 02:25 PM

Boobirds in full fly-

The entertainers not my cup of coffee, but apparently liked by the crowd.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 02:32 PM

...Last night's #bbcjubilee concert contained mostly foreign cultures - American pop and rock, and classical pieces from other European lands.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: robomatic
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 03:26 PM

My best wishes and all around Red White and Blue felicitations to the great U of K and the Great Lady who has lived and done her duty to this day.

God Save the Queen
and perdition to her enemies!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 03:38 PM

...did you used to watch "Lost in Space", Robomatic?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 05:06 PM

60 glorious years huntin' shootin, fishin' and ridin' in vast estates that the rest of us hoi-polloi have to keep off. 60 glorious years "working", aka showing up in posh clothes and posh transport and doing a little wave and saying "Hellay, and what do you do?" 60 glorious years riding out (or floating above) every recession, war and political crisis with impunity. 60 glorious years on state benefits that millions could only dream of. 60 glorious years being washed, dressed, cooked for and having your arse gratefully wiped. Long may she shit over us!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: robomatic
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 05:16 PM

And while the House of Peers withhoulds its legislative hand
And noble statesmen do not itch
To interfere in matters which
They do not understand
As bright will shine Great Britian's rays
As in Queen Bess's glorious days
As bright will shine Great Britain't rays
As in Queen Bess's Glorious Days!!!

apologies for messing a bit with Sir Schwenk's lyric

my point, and I do have one, is that without some alternative to democracy, we've got nothing to compare democracy with and we may fall into a fool's paradise, thinking we've got it over thins like coronets 'n crowns. which maybe it's true but maybe it's not true all the time. After all Russia now has a President and a Prime Minister and I'd rather have good Queen Bess the Two.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 06:41 PM

There are so many cabals and crooks and operations in this society that rob us blind and exploit us and manipulate us with open contempt that it seems ridiculous to to direct ill-natured attention to what is essentially an aspect of entertainment, and one which is as essentially harmless as Morris Dancing - which of course also seems to drive some people into paroxysms of loathing.

As for the flag-waving, it all seemed very much in the mood and tradition of Dame Edna Everage urging us to wave our gladdies in the air...

And not a commercial sposor in sight - how unlike the Olympics looming up before us...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 06:56 PM

Hmmm. Harmless, eh? Harmless in that privilege is perpetuated? A moot point there, I'd say.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 07:25 PM

It seems a shame that whenever a group of posters start a positive thread about anything on this forum, up jump the same group of miserable pissers and moaners, determined that nobody shall be allowed to enjoy anything without having to overcome their mixture of pure malicious ignorance and misery.

Making their points with inaccuracies, rumours and outright lies, and running a mile from anything approaching the true situation, they are the most obnoxious killjoys to be found anywhere.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 08:15 PM

Calm down, Don. It's only a bloody internet forum! :-D

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 10:10 PM

Well, you detractors might wanna go live somewhere the Crown doesn't protect yer ass. No democracy. No health care. No unions. No whatever. Don't forget to write and let us know how it's working out for you.

Seems to me that a lot of Brits like living in the British Isles. You lot that don't got any substance to tell us uneducated why it's a bad shake for youse? Seriously, why do you not like being a Brit?

And, yes, I mean that in a nice yet "WTF?" way. If you tell me that you, as a Brit, would be better off without the entity that holds the right to your property in lieu of taxes but provides you the security to freehold that land, well, yer just bitin yerself in the ass. Hope it tastes good if you bite your own ass.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: meself
Date: 05 Jun 12 - 10:31 PM

How much bad music has that poor woman had to suffer through in those sixty years? Right now I'm watching some not-particularly-talented bimbo jump around saying, 'I wanna F-U - I wanna F-U - I wanna F-U F-U funk!' Or something like that. Pretty classy, anyway. At least I can sigh and roll my eyes, and change the channel - she has to pretend she's enjoying it ....

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 04:27 AM

No democracy. No health care. No unions. No whatever.

Sounds like the Britain I know and...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 04:52 AM

Jealousy is a very ugly emotion, and it turns its sufferers into ugly people.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 04:54 AM

I should like to know precisely how the Crown protects democracy (the royals are the epitome of unelected, hereditary privilege), health care (they use only the finest private clinics in the kingdom, all at our expense) or unions (almost every administration during her reign has sought, and often succeeded in that quest, to curtail the role of trade unions).

As for whether it feels good to be a Brit, well we have a diverse and beautiful country. We also have an utterly vile imperialist history. So expect no simple answer.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 05:07 AM

bit late to this party -though started a related thread about prog -rock, monarchy and psychology to which you are all invited.

my one loyal to the monarchy act so far was to attempt to drink 25 pints for the '77 jubilee.(no, i got lost way before that) but all my adult life i have had accusations of being unpatriotic, commie -back to russia etc. had the discussion many times but always felt i was more patriotic than the folk i argued with (though never able to convince anyone!)

for me patriotism is great music, great writing, great beer and pubs, festivals, a radical spirit,ken loach, punk, west coast of scotland and the lake district, john benson, john martyn, john cooper clarke, joe strumer, curlews, good manners and many, many etcs.

life is too short to pay any attention or approval to the usual soul-destroying indicators of patriotism-monarchy, military, conservatives, capitalism and church -unless it is to have a go at them, in the hope that -come the glorious day- i can add a modern bloodless revolution to the things i can feel proud about in my country.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 05:17 AM

An atheistic Amen to that!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 06:43 AM

"for me patriotism is great music, great writing, great beer and pubs, festivals, a radical spirit,ken loach, punk, west coast of scotland and the lake district, john benson, john martyn, john cooper clarke, joe strumer, curlews, good manners and many, many etcs"

It's possible to love all of those, yet not be an ugly person eaten alive with jealousy of those whose lot in life puts them better-placed than oneself. There are a great many who, like me, are living testimony to that fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 06:51 AM

"Well, you detractors might wanna go live somewhere the Crown doesn't protect yer ass. No democracy. No health care. No unions. No whatever. Don't forget to write and let us know how it's working out for you."

The Crown doesn't provide any go those things. We pay for some of them, some of them come from the suffering of ordinary working folk that stood up to the system and democracy in the UK today means corporate governance without accountability. The Queen has no power, she's a distraction and her son Chaz is a man with outright disdain for the democratic process, which he ignores when it suits him (as in the Chelsea Barracks debacle). This idiot, who prefers magic to science will be king one day, may the old gods help us.

Whilst the masses have been waving flags and celebrating a thousand years of their ancestors getting shat on for the dubious benefits of monarchs, god and the glory of empire (i.e. invading other countries and killing people), over in Chantilly, the 1% mutual wankathon for the rich and powerful Bilderberg has signed off on intervention in Syria, is re-jigging the internet to their own ends (Google it) and done all this and fuck knows what else without ever bringing 'democracy' into the process to muddle things.

You might gain some insight from listening to the people who actually live here. There's a long history here in the UK of republicanism and ridiculing the monarch, her family and government and long may it continue. Not everyone automatically defers to authority figures, some have a mind of their own and many of the most original thinkers of these islands have been iconoclasts. Thank fuck.

The 1000 ships on the Thames was good though, especially the little ships from Dunkirk and the narrow boats.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 06:55 AM

certainly not eaten alive with jealousy of anyone in the establishment. i feel sorry for all of us who are taken in by the lies and distortions of those who rule us, lie to us and steal from us. to participate in the experience they have designed for us, to subjugate and patronise us - is it to part of the problem. it's often a jolly and apparently harmless experience, we may choose to accept it all but at least think about why it is and try to work out what is worth while for yourself -
(altogether now) - WE ARE ALL INDIVIDUALS! and can be free citizens if we choose.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 06:59 AM

"Right now I'm watching some not-particularly-talented bimbo jump around saying, 'I wanna F-U - I wanna F-U - I wanna F-U F-U funk!' Or something like that. Pretty classy, anyway. At least I can sigh and roll my eyes, and change the channel - she has to pretend she's enjoying it ...."...I'm sure, meself, I heard a miracle just before that - Kylie's voice came through the sound-system before Shirley stopped straining..?!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 11:55 AM

I can't see "the Chelsea barracks debacle" as a very convincing example of democratic rights being trampled underfoot by Charles' successful lobbying against the proposed Rodgers redevelopment. Nodody got a chance to vote about whether they wanted it - and I'm pretty sure if people had been given a vote on it most would have seen it the same way as Charles did.

As with the famed National Gallery "monstrous carbuncle" which was nearly inflicted on us.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 12:06 PM

The point isn't whether people would have voted for or against it, the point is due process wasn't followed because Chaz called up another group of unelected types, the Qatar royal family and persuaded them to withdraw funding because he didn't like it. Even a high court judge thought he was exceeding his remit as he also lobbied Westminster Council and the Mayor.

He ignored the democratic process and his view counted above everyone who didn't get to express theirs. That is simply wrong, it's elitist and it ignores the common consensus - whichever way that leans.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 12:16 PM

Jealousy is a very ugly emotion, and it turns its sufferers into ugly people.

This is a choice Right Wing myth. It's not a matter of being jealous of anyone - it's a matter of despising a system of heartless self-interest that generates those levels of priviledge anyway. It's a matter of conscience amnd humanity in the face of the social & cultural apartheid that mires this country into a mess of grotesque wealth on one hand and ghastly poverty on the other. It's also a matter of tearfully lamenting a once beautiful country carved up on ancient fuedal privileges and UTTERLY WASTED by developers and other opportunists in the name of progress.

I'm reminded of an old blind man who got his sight back after 60 years having lost it at the age of ten. He took one look at the ugly mess that had become of the town he remembered so well and hung himself.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 12:20 PM

I would say that the elitists were those who thought they knew best what developments should be imposed on us.
Like the ones who dumped the 60s high rise flats and town centres on us, while they went to live in traditional style communities.
It all had to be torn down, but they kept their millions.
As McGrath said, Charles was actually speaking for the ordinary Joe AGAINST the elitists.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 12:50 PM

It all had to be torn down, but they kept their millions.

Not all, in fact this country is one ugly concrete mess of development abomination wherever you look. God knows there're even listing some of these monstrosities now! The piss reeking disgrace that is Preston Bus Station for Christ's sake. And many a high-rise hell still stands testimony to the same grasping inhumanity that sends the windfarms sprawling over our once beautiful countryside today. But hey, great views from the top, eh?

Odd then that we still retain our images of the picturesque. I still have my Grandmother's little picture of a thatched country farm with geese in the yard. It was a birthday card as I recall - she like it so much she had it framed & hung on the wall of her shoddy post-war Sunderland council semi in one of the roughest estates in the North East. I wonder - do people who live in thatched country cottages have pictures of such estates on their walls?

I hope and pray there is a parallel universe somewhere in which they got it right.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 01:13 PM

Agree.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 01:35 PM

MtheGM made a comment on the naval uniforms worn by Prince Philip and Prince Charles - The uniforms worn were 100% naval - Ceremonial Day Dress:

Ceremonial Day Dress
This is worn only by Admirals and Vice Admirals along with members of the Royal Family and consists of a tailcoat with white facing and gold edging worn with gold shoulder boards, black and gold belt and gold laced black trousers. It is worn at parades such as Lord High Admiral's Divisions (BRNC) or at state occasions.

For the edification of Steve Shaw and co. The Royal Family costs the UK Tax Payer nothing.

In exchange for the now defunct civil list payments the Exchequer got their hands on what is called "The Crown Estate"

By the bye it should be remembered or recognised by all that the minute you pay your taxes (as members of the Royal Family do) the money is no longer yours (as tax payers or anybody else)- the money belongs to the Exchequer and it is up to them what it gets spent on (That's why "Road Tax" does not get spent on roads).

So what does pay for our Head of State.

Now the defunct civil list that SS referred to:
About £7.5million goes to the Queen - this covers Official "Head of State" type expenses. The remaining £395,000 goes to Prince Philip for his Official "Husband of the Head of State" expenses. But you said the Royal Family as "Head of State" costs us £32million so who pays it? Rhetorical question Steve so don't strain yourself (It isn't revenue gained from Tourists).

I will introduce you to three of the best run enterprises in the United Kingdom:

The Crown Estate - worth £230million a year in profit to the Exchequer - and that is AFTER all costs related to the upkeep of the Queens "Official" residences have been paid (that is the missing £24million from your £32million)

The Duchy of Cornwall - Belongs to the Prince of Wales, heir to the throne - Last year the profit (voluntarily taxable) was £17million and that Dear Steve, is the profit after all costs (including security) for the Prince's family and household have been paid for.

The Duchy of Lancaster - Owned by the Queen, last year the profit (voluntarily taxable) was £9million and that Dear Steve, is the profit after all costs (including security) for the Queens family, excluding the Prince of Wales and his family, and household have been paid for.

So the sums add up as follows - using your now defunct "Civil List" model:

The Exchequer pays out - £7.9million

The Exchequer in return receives - £230million + £8million + £34million = ££242million

Now I would say that that was rather a good deal wouldn't you?

By the way Steve you would not last one week working their schedule and the HM The Queen and Prince Philip are 86 and almost 91 respectively. Don't know about you but being forced to always be impeccably turned out and transported around to be affable and appear interested in everything said to you by complete and utter strangers under the constant gaze of the press sounds a bloody hard and thankless task and pretty nightmarish to me.

Oh by the way Steve how much have you raised for Charity over your course on earth so far?? How many Charities and Foundations are you Patron of?? i.e. what "good" have you done in your life??

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 01:59 PM

Steve:

Charity involvement and Patronage which has resulted in hundreds of millions being raised. If you tote up the involvement of the Queen, Prince Philip, Charles, Anne, Andrew and Edward the number is 2,397.

Take the entire Royal Family and the number is over 3,538

The Queen is 86 right?

Typical Morning:
The Queen's working day begins like many people's - at her desk.

After scanning the daily British newspapers, The Queen reviews her correspondence.

Every day, 200-300 (and sometimes many more) letters from the public arrive. The Queen chooses a selection to read herself and tells members of her staff how she would like them to be answered.

This enables Her Majesty personally to see a typical cross-section of her daily correspondence. Virtually every letter is answered by staff in her Private Secretary's office or by a lady-in-waiting.

The Queen will then see, separately, two of her Private Secretaries with the daily quota of official papers and documents. This process takes upwards of an hour.

Every day of every year, wherever she is, The Queen receives from government ministers, and from her representatives in the Commonwealth and foreign countries, information in the form of policy papers, Cabinet documents, telegrams, letters and other State papers.

These are sent up to her by the Private Secretaries in the famous 'red boxes'. All of these papers have to be read and, where necessary, approved and signed.

A series of official meetings or 'audiences' will often follow. The Queen will see a number of important people.

These include overseas ambassadors and high commissioners, newly appointed British ambassadors, senior members of the British and Commonwealth Armed Forces on their appointment and retirement, and English bishops and judges on their appointment.

Each meeting usually lasts 10 to 20 minutes, and usually The Queen and her visitor meet alone.

The Queen may also meet a number of people who have won prizes or awards in a variety of fields such as literature or science, to present them individually with their prize.

If there is an Investiture - a ceremony for the presentation of honours and decorations - it begins at 11.00am and lasts just over an hour. The Queen usually meets around 100 people at each Investiture to present Orders, decorations and medals.

The Queen will often lunch privately. Every few months, she and The Duke of Edinburgh will invite a dozen guests from a wide variety of backgrounds to an informal lunch. Occasionally, the guest list may consist of far fewer people, such as a newly appointed or retiring Governor-General and their guest.

If The Queen is spending the morning on engagements away from her desk and other commitments, she will visit up to three venues before lunch, either alone or jointly with The Duke of Edinburgh.

On a regional visit, The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh lunch with a wide variety of people in places ranging from town halls to hospitals.

Typical Afternoon:
In the afternoons, The Queen often goes out on public engagements.

Such visits require meticulous planning beforehand to meet the hosts' requirements.

And The Queen prepares for each visit by briefing herself on whom she will be meeting and what she will be seeing and doing.

Royal engagements are carefully selected by The Queen from a large number of invitations sent to her each year, often by the Lord-Lieutenants (The Queen's representatives in counties throughout the United Kingdom).

This helps to ensure the widest possible spread and to make effective use of The Queen's time.

If the engagement is outside London, her journeys are often by air using a helicopter or an RAF aircraft.

The Queen carries out around 430 engagements (including audiences) a year, to meet people, open events and buildings, unveil plaques and make speeches.

Such engagements can include visits to schools, hospitals, factories, military units, art galleries, sheltered accommodation for elderly people, hostels for the homeless, local community schemes in inner city areas, and other British and Commonwealth organisations.

The Queen regularly goes out for the whole day to a particular region or city. If the visit is a busy one, or if it lasts more than a day, then The Queen will travel overnight on the Royal Train.

The Duke of Edinburgh will often accompany The Queen on such visits; when this happens, they will carry out some engagements jointly and others separately to ensure that the maximum number of people and organisations can be visited.

The Queen may end the afternoon seeing a number of Government ministers in a meeting of the Privy Council.

Typical Evening:
The Queen's working day does not stop at the end of the afternoon.

Early evening may see a meeting with the Prime Minister. The Queen has a weekly meeting alone with the Prime Minister, when they are both in London (in addition to other meetings throughout the year).

This usually takes place on Wednesdays at 6.30 pm. No written record is made of such meetings; neither The Queen nor the Prime Minister talk about what is discussed between them, as communications between The Queen and the Prime Minister always remains confidential.

At about 7.30 pm a report of the day's parliamentary proceedings, written by one of the Government's Whips, arrives. The Queen always reads this the same evening.

On some evenings, The Queen may attend a film première, a variety of concert performances in aid of a charitable cause, or a reception linked to organisations of which she is Patron.

The Queen also regularly hosts official receptions at Buckingham Palace (usually with other members of the Royal Family), such as those for the Diplomatic Corps and The Queen's Award for Industry.

Her Majesty may also hold receptions ahead of overseas visits. In 2007, prior to attending the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Uganda, The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh gave a reception at Buckingham Palace for Commonwealth Africans living and working in the United Kingdom.

Other receptions mark the work of particular groups in the community, such as those recently given for members of the British design and music worlds.

The Queen has numerous private interests, which can coincide with her public work, to complete her working day.

Her Majesty also attends the Derby and the Summer Race Meeting at Ascot, a Royal occasion. As a keen owner and breeder of racehorses, she often sees her horses run at other meetings.

As owner of private estates at Balmoral and Sandringham, The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh oversee the management of the estates which are run on a commercial basis. She takes a close interest in all aspects of estate life, particularly in the tenant farmers and employees who live and work on the estates.

Through her public and private work, The Queen is well-briefed and well-known. She has met many more people from all walks of life both in this country and overseas than her predecessors.

This takes time and effort. Often, one of the last lights on in the Palace at night is The Queen finishing her 'red box' of official papers.

Every Day Steve - Don't know about you - I wouldn't have as a gift.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 02:04 PM

Thank you Teribus, for saving me a lot of work.

I was about halfway through researching that when you posted it.

It deals with one of the most important anti Monarchist lies.

The other classic of ignorance and dishonesty is the inbreeding and stupidity claim.

The RAF simply do not hand over the controls of any £20 million aircraft to stupid youngsters, no matter who their families may be.

Entry to Cranwell is not restricted to the upper classes. It is restricted to those with the highest intelligence, aptitude and determination to succeed, and its graduates are as likely to come from the Old Kent Road as from the Shires.

All of the members of the Royal Family entering the military have qualified and all have passed out at the lowest rank for the job, e.g. Pilot Officer William Wales (future King of England), who flies Sea King rescue helicopters, is paid as a pilot officer and lives in a cottage which his wife manages without full time staff, just as every other wife whose husband works at the Anglesey base.

Check out the others and it's the same story.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 02:13 PM

I hae often disagreed with Teribus, but I give him a big 'thank you' for the summary of the estates and their profitability. I have read most of that at some time or other, but it would take me quite an effort to dig it out and summarize as well as he has done.

In addition to that side of the coin, is the tremendous pride that the Crown provides to many people, evidenced by the hundreds of thousands of ordinary folk around the Commonwealth who celebrated.

I am originally an America, now a Canadian. The British democracy is flawed, like the American and Canadian (and it seems the Australian), but it gives most people a reasonably good life, and the flaws have much to do with our own current convictions, right or wrong, when we enter the voting booth, and nothing to do with a constitutional monarchy.

(I liked Charles' intervention. Looks like he will make an interesting King.)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: number 6
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 02:14 PM

Hell's Angels MC (that's the motorcycle club) have raised thousands for charities ... giving donations to social causes are a helpful public relations tool ... a common ploy characteristic of various organized crime organizations and unscrupulous corporations.

biLL ... just thought I'd throw that one into this thread ... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 02:34 PM

The post by number six has little applicability to this thread, but with regard to organized crime, if you can't prosecute successfully, take their donations, with thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 02:51 PM

Teribus ~~ Re: Dress Uniforms ~~ Yes, thank you. But the gold shoulder boards ref'd to used never [did they?] to carry the equivalent Army rank. Is this an innovation; if so, it seems to me to fight the RN element of the ceremonial uniform.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 04:37 PM

MtheMG

The shoulderboards for OF-10; OF-9; OF-8 & OF-7 are completely different for Navy and Army Dress Uniforms - Most similar at first glance are those for OF-10 all the rest are very different the Naval ones being much more elaborate.

OF-10 Admiral of the Fleet:
The Crown is clearly above the Wreath with crossed Batons and the tips of the wreath are almost closed. These emblems also appear "inboard" i.e. at the neck end of the shoulderboard

OF-10 Field Marshall:
The Crown is positioned in between the open tips of the Wreath with the crossed Batons and the emblems are located at the jacket sleeve end of the shoulderboard.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 05:19 PM

Thank you ~~ most helpful and informative.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 05:23 PM

Don ~~ Is Prince William still a Pilot Officer? He was wearing a Flight Lieutenant's insignia on Monday. Prince Harry appeared now to be a Captain. But they did indeed start off at lowest commissioned rank, like any other newly passed-out officer.


~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 07:11 PM

And this Crown Estate malarkey and the Duchy of Cornwall: by what right do these inbred pillocks come to own all these riches? There is nothing more powerful than owning land, yet no-one on the planet ever made a single acre of land (though I suppose you could make half a case for building dykes to reclaim land from the sea...) If you own vast tracts of land, it's almost certainly because your ancestors enclosed it to keep the riffraff out. Stole it, in other words, then got rich by becoming squires, landlords and tithe-takers.

For the sake of accuracy: The Queen's official expenditure decreased by 5.3% from £33.9 million in 2009/10 to £32.1 million in 2010/11 according to the royal public finances annual report.

Do look it up!

As for Her Maj's workload, she spends months every year relaxing on vast estates out of the public gaze, and always has done. Go through your list again and cross off the "jobs" that wouldn't exactly cause the world to collapse around our ears if she just dropped them. Gosh, these monarchists are the finest on the planet when it comes to suspension of critical thought! Except for believers in God, of course...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 07:20 PM

ditto-thanks tiberius for the info.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 07:28 PM

this conversation is getting incredibly bizarre. pips on shoulders-angels on the end of a pin. who cares? with what they own and the privilege that comes with it i would expect them to do a bit of 'work' - we all know many people who work harder in difficult jobs with nothing like the rewards and recognition they deserve. no-one would begrudge the royal family a well-appointed council house for their public service but no-one -no matter who they are - deserves the property and adulation they get. it's what they represent that matters - a decrepit and unjust system, where we are subjects not free citizens. and when did a member of that family ever have the wit or conscience to speak up for ordinary people having a hard time under a system that sustains them and their friends in a life of luxury? just look at the gang of dictators and fantasists invited to the royal party...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 07:39 PM

""Don ~~ Is Prince William still a Pilot Officer? He was wearing a Flight Lieutenant's insignia on Monday. Prince Harry appeared now to be a Captain. But they did indeed start off at lowest commissioned rank, like any other newly passed-out officer.""

You may well be right Mike, as I haven't checked, but the point is that they are earning their rank, just as any other officer candidate does after graduating at the lowest rank, not being handed it on a plate because of their royal connections.

The army, Navy and Air Force are not going to promote a dunce to a position in which he can kill other personnel.

The number of pilots who can even qualify to fly military helicopters is very small indeed. It requires very specific skills which are uncommon.

It should be obvious to the meanest intellect that the only royals who are accorded ranks for which they may not be fully qualified are the Monarch and the Consort, along with a few of the highest ranking peers.

The ranks accorded are honorary and do not involve commanding military personnel, as should also be blindingly obvious.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 07:45 PM

I love the way that "profitability" of stolen royal estates is used as a argument in favour of the monarchy. Anyone like to make a case for Rachmann-style landlordism (or, indeed, the landlordism of today in London that routinely puts up rents to take the whole of the tenant's housing benefit)? Very profitable! What about the vast profits made by banks that won't lend money to small businesses? I'm certain that the monarchy makes healthy profits from its historical ill-gotten gains, but what sort of justification is that? I once read, in an idle moment in Morrisons, the label of a pack of premium Duchy Originals bangers (the dearest sausages on the shelf). Not a single bloody ingredient came from anywhere near the Duchy!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 07:46 PM

There ya go. No matter she does all she does and "shakes hands" with politicians and royalty (yes, there is royalty in other countries) the world over and provides all she does in her service, she is shat upon.

"with what they own"??? With what she owns, she could just say fuck you, I shant bother doing my duty in looking after affairs that affect you. Like I said earlier, watch the TV program... read a wee bit... understand the history... the present... the future.

Hey, I'd pick her first to be on my team.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 07:57 PM

Don. It is as plain as the nose on yer fizzog that the royal chappies are fast-tracked into the military and that this is done for public relations reasons, not because they have fightin' and heroism coursing through their blue-blooded veins. You will note that not a single royal ever comes home in a body bag, or even with a cut finger, and they never will. This is because they are accorded full protection whilst they are "out there." "Front-line" has a very elastic definition when it comes to them. Just think. All those royal lads will, one day, have to look suitably sombre in front of the Cenotaph. Whatever else happens, they must be seen to be sporting a pound or two of medals and the last thing they want is The Guardian telling the truth about how fake they are. The royals in the forces have nothing to do with swashbuckling bravery and everything to do with the ancient tradition of putting royals in uniform in order to delude the rest of us into thinking how brave and "one of us" they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 08:02 PM

- i shant bother doing my duty in affairs that affect you- what on earth does this mean? i thought the point is that she is an inconsequential figurehead in terms of politics. i suppose you mean having dinner with the king of saudi arabia affects me-but how?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 06 Jun 12 - 08:42 PM

I didn't realize they were going to play the Jubilee concert in US television last night, but ABC aired it. I researched it and find they replaying it on Saturday night, for any in the US who wanted to watch it.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 12:12 AM

How do they have what they have? Not just the Royal Family but the "Aristocracy" in general - because at some point down the line they earned it, either by service, duty, appointment or by straight forward purchase.

Doubt that Steve?? Then go and research a little thing called the "Feudal System" which a long, long time ago provided the only form of "protection" there was. The Lord of the Manor did not only have all the perks, he also had the duty of physically protecting and looking after those who lived on the land given into his charge. If he was sensible he did look after them, and generally most did, unlike the aristocracy in France and look what happened to them.

I do not envy anyone any possession as you and petecockermouth seem to. It is a pointless and extremely negative thing to engage in and like some who have already mentioned it on this thread I am at the end of my life where I find I need less and less, not more and more.

Does our Head of State work hard - Yes a great deal harder than you have ever had to, and almost a lifetime past the date she would have retired had she been a private citizen. What does the current Monarch represent? An unbroken line and link with our nation's history that reaches back almost 1000 years.

Noticed you dodged the questions I asked you

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 04:33 AM

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.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 04:39 AM

the royal chappies are fast-tracked into the military and that this is done for public relations reasons

This is not true Steve.
If they were no good, there would be too many people who knew about it to conceal it.

Have you forgotten that Prince Edward tried and failed to make it into the Marines?
He was not up to it, the others were.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 05:22 AM

"How do they have what they have? Not just the Royal Family but the "Aristocracy" in general - because at some point down the line they earned it, either by service, duty, appointment or by straight forward purchase."

Or stole it: William the Bastard gifting our land to his henchmen, or the theft that occurred during the highland clearances, plantation of Ulster, or the acts of enclosure.

All appalling acts of theft, and the aristocracy and the monarchy were involved in all of these, and have benefited. The idea that they are some benign force for good that deserve our undying respect is a fallacy. The Normans were an occupying force that laid waste to vast tracks of this country.

"What does the current Monarch represent? An unbroken line and link with our nation's history that reaches back almost 1000 years."

Luckily, the ordinary people of these islands represent and unbroken link with our nation's history that reaches back 14,000 years.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 05:56 AM

I don't dodge questions "that don't suit me". I post at considerable length on all manner of topics, but what I don't tend to do is jump through your hoops. If you persist in asking the same tendentious question then your motives for asking are highly suspect and my chances of coming out of your booby-trap unscathed are minimal. This is the internet and I'll debate, or not debate, exactly what I want to, thanks, you arrogant prick.

However. I have nothing against ownership, even ownership of land. But when it comes to the latter in particular, there are questions to be asked, and they are all predicated on the stubborn fact that no-one ever made the land. So I'm perfectly entitled to ask someone who owns more than his apparent fair share of land how he came by it. Invariably, the answer is that either he or his ancestors ultimately took it by force. Apparent fair share? Let's put it something like this. In a town, I think it's right that a householder should own the land that his house (and modest garden) stands on. If he's a tenant, he should have far greater rights to stay put than he has now and he should not pay ground rent. He has to pay rent on his house, but someone made the house, unlike the land it stands on, and charging rent is fair in principle. How you came by the houses you charge rent on is another issue, of course. In the country, your fair share is the land you can work yourself or with your family or as a small business that you can control yourself without armies of overseers. That might be ten acres of the best land or five hundred acres of hill farm, or half an acre on an industrial estate. One of the worst things that ever happened to this country was the acquisition of vast tracts of land by people who are not farmers. They are the biggest vandals on the planet. They eradicate wildlife, demolish biodiversity, pollute land and water, throw people out of the countryside (so that schools, pubs and post offices have to close down) and turn the countryside into charmless, sterile prairie (you'll find these very people leading the singing of Land Of Hope And Glory at big royal ceremonies, without a trace of irony, of course). Mostly, the income they generate comes from farming and tourism, both trades which are thankless, seasonal and grossly underpaid (farming used to be far more enjoyable, I imagine, when skills were involved, but these days the most "enjoyable" thing you get to do is to drive a massive combine wearing ear-defenders all day while breathing in lethal dust from polluted fields, or hooking up five hundred cows' tits to automated milking machines). The latest rich-bloke fad is to take advantage of the ridiculously lax planning laws (which always favour the wealthy landowner in any case) in order to erect ugly, useless wind turbines willy-nilly all over the countryside. Well you would, wouldn't you, if you get £50,000 per annum per turbine, each with a footprint of just a few square metres of your land! People who own vast areas of land have no interest in working that land usefully and productively for the greater good of the country, and neither have their soul-destroyed tenants, who have no personal investment in the land they work. The big land-owner's one interest is in being a landlord, which means doing nothing whilst other people generate wealth that you then take great chunks of. The principle is that you take all the wealth that the land, and the tenant, produces, except for the small amount that your tenants need to subsist, and, if the tenancy laws make your tenants a wee bit insecure into the bargain, well that's all to the better. Welcome to the real world of the filthy rich, the bit that hides behind the pageantry. But people have to own land, not just be tenants, even though they didn't make it. If you own your fair share of land you have a personal investment in it and will, unlike the big landlords, use it wisely and to its maximum capacity, and you leave it in a fit state to be passed on. The only argument is what constitutes your fair share. That's not an easy one, but one thing's for sure: owning tens of thousands of acres, most of which you never even get to set foot on, is plain wrong. You might never even shake hands with some of the people who generate all your wealth for you. Bad for the country and bad for the landowner, not to speak of his tenants. Don't go from what I say. Just have a look round.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 06:27 AM

A reply. Thank you. Agree, predictably, with few of the points made; but at least you have made them and endeavoured, at last, to answer some of the questions raised by me in all my arrogant-prickery*, and by others. Haven't defined the point I asked about where ownership of property becomes perverse; but I appreciate you have addressed the problem in general terms and up to a point.

~M·aka·You·arrogant·prick~


*[How charming! I thought it was you who objected above to personal abuse: but perhaps it was, as Mark Twain said of Homer, not you, but another man of the same name living at the same time?]

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 06:48 AM

Seems to me most people in this world are meek & self-respecting in their humility and are quite happy with their lot in life - the simple pleasures of life, love, community and sharing. I dare say say this has been the way of the peasant / working classes since long before the Harrying of the North and long after Peterloo or The Miners Strike and other regrettable occasions in British History when the brutality of the state stamped all over them if only to let them know who's boss.

Envy has nothing to do with it. God knows all we ever wanted was a simple life, but our lot was always to be ruled over by power-crazed idiots simply because we lacked brutish ambition and the machinery of capital, war, law, authority, education, industry etc. etc. to put it into effect, much less the inclination to rampage, rape and burn people into cowering submission. That's your fuedal legacy right there; it's made the UK the great & noble nation that it is today.

This is worth a read:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/opinion/krugman-the-austerity-agenda.html?_r=3&smid=fb-share

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 07:02 AM

Spot on Suibhne.

I did volunteer to help with the jubilee celebrations in our village despite not being a monarchist. This was because I believe that real, living communities are a good thing for both the people that live in them and wider society, and many people from across the board came together for a couple of days, and I wanted to do my small part for the good of my community.

Mind you, I didn't toast Brenda, and I didn't sing that godawful national anthem, or wear the butcher's apron in any shape or form. I did drinks lots of rather good cider. I quietly gave a thought to Wistanley and my ancestors.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 07:14 AM

Haven't defined the point I asked about where ownership of property becomes perverse

Ownership brings out the worst in people; the need to have, whilst others have not. It engenders greed, selfishness, & other more brutish traits of our animal past that never balance out for the common good, but only benefit of the few. But even those of us stuck in negative equity in areas impoverished by a completely unnecessary recession are only home owners because the alternative is unthinkable. But is that any excuse? In the four years we've lived here we've had 5 sets of tenants in the house next door, the landlord of which is just a bloke who happens to own a house - he couldn't give a shit about the comfort & wellbeing of his tenants, or even that of his property. Methinks the situation is hardly untypical in this noble grasping & unpleasant country of ours.

When the only vested interest is capital, humanity goes out of the window. Sad to say certain of the posts here display a similar lack of humanity in the face of what is a very deep concern for our common & collective wellbeing as a nation.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 07:31 AM

Could anyone tell me the TRUE cost of the Royal Family, not just the monarch and their immediate family but all the Dukes of this and that who get funds from the Government, together with all the on costs, trains, planes, cars, security, buildings, staff, grants for this and that etc etc. I would suggest that the actual cost of supporting a relatively small number of people is far higher than any of us imagine it to be.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 07:38 AM

Spot on Suibhne.

I dare say we'd have got involved if we'd been around. We arrived back late on Monday night to a street alive with partying, laughter, fireworks & booming dance music. It felt great - real Folklore! Yes - Wonderful Jubilee Celebrations. I'm forever intrigued & heartened by the good will of the British working classes even when it comes to celebrating the monarchy, even to the point of being wary of how we'd fare as a republic. But whatever my feelings as an Anarchist & Athiest, my loyality to those individual Proletarian Monarchists / Catholics / High & Low Anglicans / Moslems (& even UKIP members) of my acquaintance invariably manifests as a general tolerance rather than outright despair, forever optimistic that we'll get there one day...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 07:46 AM

GUEST ~ Name the Dukes of this and that who get funds from the Civil List. I know of none outside the immediate Royal Family.

"Ownership brings out the worst in people;" Does that include your ownership of your car, Suibhne, or the shirt you are wearing, or the book you have been reading or the CD you have been playing or the DVD you have been watching? If not, I ask again, where does the cut-off point come?

The tenants in the house next to mine appear most contented with their lot; the owner of the property keeps it in good repair and they seem to have a perfectly rational business relationship. It is all to easy to generalise from a particular adverse experience of one's own; but not, I feel bound to add, a sign of a particularly intelligent approach to a general question.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Will Fly
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 08:03 AM

Oh Michael, don't be so tiresome - you know well perfectly well that it all boils down to a question of scale.

Why don't you define the cut-off point between misery and happiness yourself? Do you have millions? If not, are you happy? If so, why are you happy? Etc.

We live in a country where the gap between the richest and the poorest is growing daily - a fact acknowledged by every article about the topic in any of the newspapers - so surely this particular status quo is worth challenging.

In an earlier post I queried the apparent need and greed of someone like R. Murdoch to own all the worlds media. Where is his particular cut-off point, do you think?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 08:23 AM

If not, I ask again, where does the cut-off point come?


We all own a few pieces of crap & scraps; they hardly define us or empower us in the same way as wealth, status, property & entire estates and the tied lives beholden thereto. This is why I find Left-Wing takes of Kipling's The Land so laughable. Old Hobden doesn't even own his own caricatured cliché of peasant servility to his feudal Lord & Master. My meagre bits & bobs will soon be gone - obsolete folkloric fodder to be picked over in the car boot sales of future days before ending up in the great landfill that was once our Green & Pleasant Land (Hob - what about that river-bit for filling in with crap?).

The other day my brother posted me a hat box which contains, he says, my recently deceased mother's few worldly trinkets. I think the most valuable things in there are likely to be her old Beatles singles, but it all meant the world to her. I doubt I'll ever open it though - it arrived on what would have been her 81st birthday and went straight in the back of a cupboard. Christ said set not your treasures on earth. As if we have any choice, eh? Our few crappy trinkets & gew-gaws are symbolic of a hope, souvenirs, echoes of meaning and memory, but entirely valueless in and of themselves. Like our car which we hang onto because although it's a good runner, we know it'll go straight for scrap. Same with this computer, or any of the 'property' I 'own'.

Capital binds us by the wasteful idiocy of built-in obsolescence. I guess there's your cut-off point right there, Michael.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 08:54 AM

Oh, Will, don't be so irritable.

I don't accept a specific cutoff point as I thought I had made manifest. So your final question is wilfully otiose ~~

~~ and, er, tiresome!

〠

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Will Fly
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 09:23 AM

Michael, my point is neither lazy nor redundant - to use plain English - but merely reinforces the fact that there is no harm in questioning the growing extremes of poverty and riches in this country and the reasons for it.

To question this growing gap, some definition of what is acceptable and unacceptable in terms of rags and riches is surely appropriate.

If you think such questions are tiresome, then don't discuss them, accept the status quo, and retire to your ivory tower. I prefer not to - even if you do find it tiresome.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 11:32 AM

What is unplain about the perfectly standard word 'otiose', Will?

I suppose I see your main point. But I feel I have caused some of the more foolish lefties to shift from their original entrenched pathetic, long-since confuted "All property is theft" foolishness; which I will admit to having done, in time-honoured quasi-casuistic fashion, by refining the question almost to the point of reductio ad absurdum. Prior to that, foul-mouthed Steve would doubtless have gone on for ever denouncing the ownership of anything, even a packet of chips one had just bought for 90p at a takeaway.

Sorry if you found it tiresome; but imo it wanted doing to bring old Foulmouth to the point of actually admitting "I have nothing against ownership, even ownership of land" (Alleluia!); which he did so graciously & gracefully by denouncing me, after all his resentments expressed above concerning the terms in which he had been addressed, as an "arrogant prick" for simply sticking to my argument and pointing out his evasiveness in response.

What a little charmer he is, to be sure.

~M~

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 11:47 AM

You are an arrogant prick, frankly. You appear to revel in the use of self-regarding, arcane vocabulary, and you smeared me with Nazi-esque allusions, remember? When you're not doing that you're being patronising or asking stupid questions. Your personal input into debate is threadbare to say the least. Apart from that, do carry on. Don't trip up over your inflated ego, now.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 12:01 PM

"Or stole it: William the Bastard gifting our land to his henchmen, or the theft that occurred during the highland clearances, plantation of Ulster, or the acts of enclosure. - Sugarfoot Jack

Duke William of Normandy:
When King Edward died at the beginning of 1066, the lack of a clear heir led to a disputed succession in which several contenders laid claim to the throne of England.

1: Duke William of Normandy's claim to the English throne derived from his familial relationship with the childless King Edward the Confessor. King Æthelred II of England having married Emma, the sister of Richard II, Duke of Normandy in 1002. So William the Bastard was a blood relation to Edward the Confessor.

2: Earl of Wessex Harold Godwinson, brother-in-law to the late King Edward the Confessor. Harold Godwinson was not a blood relation.

3: King Harald III of Norway otherwise known as Harald Hardrada - His claim to the throne was based on an agreement between his predecessor Magnus I of Norway, and the earlier King of England Harthacanute, whereby if either died without heir, the other would inherit both England and Norway. Pretty shakey claim

So as far as the succession went after the death of King Edward the Confessor there was only one claimant who was a blood relative. So nothing was stolen at all although both Harold Godwinson and Harald Hardrada did attempt to steal a Crown. Damned right that the lands of those who opposed William be forfeit and gifted to William's supporters, that was how things worked, serfs and slaves under Saxon Lords became serfs and slaves under Norman Lords so no change there.

Highland Clearances:
I would be interested in knowing when you think that they started, and who it was that started them. The land belonged to the Clan Chief and he dictated who lived on it and by it. The clearances by and large were economic. Around the same time that the "Highland Clearances" were beginning the "Clearances" in the Borders were coming to an end. The new King who jointly sat on the thrones of both Scotland and England wanted to get rid of the trouble-makers in his "middle-shires" which rather neatly leads us on to -

The Plantation of Ulster:
During Elizabeth the First's reign, Chief O'Neil had tried his very best to make Ireland a colony of Spain with himself as its Viceroy. He rebelled against Elizabeth and had to flee. In 1588 there had been the scare with the Armada so mindful that in Ireland trouble might be stirred up by Spain, King James I and VI saw an ideal opportunity to kill two birds with one stone. He moved the trouble makers from the Anglo-Scottish and planted them in Ulster and gave them rebel lands. If there was one thing King James knew about his borderers they would fight like hell to hold what they had been given (After all they had been doing that amongst themselves for over 350 years without a break).

Acts of Enclosure:
These began in the 13th Century and continued through Tudor times and were had their final spurt between 1760 and 1820. In total they affected about 18.5% of the land in the country. Oddly enough Sugarfoot the worst culprits were not the rich landowners, the most rapacious exploiters of the practice were minor land owners and tennant farmers. Had the land not been enclosed the country would have starved, the Agricultural Revolution would not have happened and the Industrial Revolution would have been stunted. Ever heard of a thing called progress?

As to what the Queen "owns" Sandringham and Balmoral were bought and paid for by Prince Albert, he paid the going rate at the time and worked damned hard at building both estates up.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 12:03 PM

"Tis the royalists on this thread who have reserved for themselves the monopoly over vituperation and insults,"
,..,

Now, remind us, who said that with such self-pitying resentment on 3 june at 0727? Ah diddums.

Pots·&·Kettles. Sticks·&·Stones.

You are a pathetic little loser, Shaw. Can't even be consistent to your own declared self-regarding principles, can you!?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 12:05 PM

That's fine. I win.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 12:09 PM

"Could anyone tell me the TRUE cost of the Royal Family, not just the monarch and their immediate family but all the Dukes of this and that who get funds from the Government - Guest

Only two people get money from the Government - The Queen & Prince Philip.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 12:18 PM

I have to say T, that seems like a pretty half-hearted attempt to defend the atrocities I listed, that were perpetrated by the aristocracy and the monarchy; more like GCSE-standard propaganda than history.

Justifying the Harrying of the North? Shine on. Suggesting the Enclosure Acts were progress? Blimey.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 12:27 PM

Well, (and I think I may be post number 100!) to get back to the title of this thread, we in our village DID have wonderful Jubilee celebrations, and the children especially were thrilled with the activities on offer and their commemorative medals.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 12:27 PM

200.

Back of the net!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 12:27 PM

Arrrggghhh! Pipped at the post.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 02:31 PM

this conversation has strayed towards another....actually...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 02:41 PM

Teribus, Only the Queen receives money from the Civil List
(Currently £7,900.000) Prince Phillip of Greece and Denmark, Duke of Edinburgh, receives £359,000, from where at this time I know not. However I was of the understanding that several other members of the Royal Family received payment for their varoius duties, standing in for the monarch perhaps. I am aware that various Government departments have budgets dedicated to activities of the Royal Family and their numerous deputies. I think the Guest is trying to ascertain the total cost of all "Royal" events be it as they said travel, grace and favour housing for example, entertainment, security etc etc.
As an example according the the Civil List of 2008 the Queen spent £66,749 on wines and spirits for receptions, personally I think this is a very low figure given all the functions that the Queen hosts, (and what I spend on parties at home)perhaps individual government departments also fund events that the Queen and her deputies host but which are not funded from the Civil List. Therefore the Guest, and I for that matter, would like to know the full cost of supporting the Queen, her family and various other members of the Royal family. Anyone any ideas?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 03:47 PM

As an example according the the Civil List of 2008 the Queen spent £66,749 on wines and spirits for receptions, personally I think this is a very low figure given all the functions that the Queen hosts

She should get the buggers to bring a bottle. Few of the people who attend the Queen's "receptions" are short of a bob or two. Here's me buying three for ten quid at Asda while she spends my dough on vintage champers for rich people. Something of a microcosm there...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 05:18 PM

Honestly, Steve-the-Abuser, if I were quite as stupid as you I should try to keep the fact to myself, rather than persist in demonstrating it so blatantly on an open forum like this one.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 05:33 PM

ho-hum.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 05:36 PM

From the Officil Website of the British Monarchy:

"Other than The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh is the only member of the Royal Family to receive an annual parliamentary allowance to enable him to carry out official public duties.

Since 1993, The Queen has repaid the annual parliamentary allowances received by other members of the Royal Family. Most of the allowances received are spent on staff who support their public engagements and correspondence.

In 2000, the annual amounts payable to members of the Royal Family (which are set every ten years), were reset at their 1990 levels for the next ten years. Apart from an increase of £45,000 on the occasion of The Earl of Wessex's marriage, amounts remain as follows, provided by The Queen:

The Duke of York (£249,000 per annum)
The Earl of Wessex (£141,000 per annum)
The Princess Royal (£228,000 per annum)
The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester (£175,000 per annum)
The Duke and Duchess of Kent (£236,000 per annum)
Princess Alexandra (£225,000 per annum).

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 05:39 PM

Just for a change - one thing on which people on both sides of this dispute shoule agree on.

I'm talking about the BBC's lamentable programme covering the Thames Pageant. We should surely all agree it was pretty badly done, with pointless "celebrity" interviews slotted in in a tasteless and intrusive fashion, and horrible vox-pops every few minutes.

Of course some people might see this as a bad thing and pthers as a serve-them-right good thing. But that's another matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 06:34 PM

""You are a pathetic little loser, Shaw. Can't even be consistent to your own declared self-regarding principles, can you!?""

Wasting your breath Mike. You'll never make a silk purse out of that aural appendage.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 07:36 PM

Ho hum indeed! :-)


I win!


Well, not really. No testosterone puddle at the bottom of my turn-ups!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: ollaimh
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 10:22 PM

i suport the queen and her family as tourist attractions./thhey would make fine greeters at a tourist trap theme park and it would be a job within their mental and educational capacities. her hiney would stand gfor pictures with every tourist that passes and actually pay her way in the world. charles on the other hand might be a tourist repellant.camilla is about as charming. so will and kate would have to be relied on to be the main presenters of disney world of the royals uk. a disney world of the royals park would be much cheaper to maintain than the present palaces and infrastructure. and they would generate actual provable income for the nation.

ans shaw don't let gno get to you. his decline into profanity is pretty much to be expected from a moncton uneducated redneck.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: ollaimh
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 10:30 PM

now as to whether i would change my point of view if i inherited an estate of size well i would like to so i hereby annunce once again my campaung to be king.

i prefer king of canada but i will take anyold place that will elect me as long as they don't use the guillotine right after. or at any time.

and if you vote for me as king i promise to create the worlds' only truly egalitarian democracy. i will make everybody a member of the hosue of lords. we we all be nobility. you can be the duke of what ever you want to be duke of, or duchess or both(it's the twentyieth first century after all). yes vote for me as king and i will do it for no salary. i just want the right to busk anywhere i want in the nation and a crown. the people should know that that particular busker is the king after all.and i'd like a few rooms in a few palaces across the countrty and a decent caravan to sleep in on the road. after that i'll pat for my monarchy with busking money. if king of canada i'll happily give the same deal. i'll abolish the senate and create a canadian house of lords and make everyobe a member. again i want a room at the governor generals mansion and one at each lt gov mansion and go busking tours across the country.

so i hope i have your votes as the first elected monarch of canada and the uk. in addition i promise to die, and leave my wealth to the nation(s)

VOTE FOR ME AS KING

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: ollaimh
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 10:33 PM

OH YEAH IF YOU VOTE FOR ME AS KING I WOULD LIKE YOU TO HIRE ME A TYPIST AS WELL

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 11:55 PM

Oh Raggytash, Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, has not been Prince of Greece and Denmark since March 1947 when he renounced both titles as a condition for his engagement to Princess Elizabeth.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 12:00 AM

"Wasting your breath Mike. You'll never make a silk purse out of that aural appendage.
Don T"
.,.,
Daresay, Don. But few amusements remain at my time of life. Winding up the foulmouthed little fool helps to pass the time (tho as it sez in that fatuous farrago Waitg4Godot, it would pass anyway}. Hope he will continue to rise to the bait to ongoing entertainment of us all. Just love the way the silly little loser keeps declaring he has won, don't you? What do you think he imagines he has 'won', do you think?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 01:23 AM

and if you vote for me as king i promise to create the worlds' only truly egalitarian democracy. i will make everybody a member of the hosue of lords. we we all be nobility. you can be the duke of what ever you want to be duke of, or duchess or both~~~

,..,

Sorry olly; but W S Gilbert anticipated this scenario in Iolanthe [1882]. You are but 130 years behind the fair.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 02:10 AM

BTW: reverting to old Shaw-the-Foulmouth, Seem to dredge up from memory that, for all his anti-intellectual guff like denouncing perfectly normal vocabulary as 'arcane' and so beyond the comprehension of simple souls like him, he is actually not quite such a fool as he likes to affect; proclaiming himself, when in the mood, as a graduate of one of our more distinguished seats of learning ~ Imperial, iirc, or was it UCL?

Whichever, can't help wondering what satisfaction he gets from all this anti-intelleckchual pretence when he can't really be quite such a fool as he likes to come over.

Quite a piece of work all-in-all, aren't you, Foulmouth, me old ducki-daddles?

〠☺〠~M~〠☺〠

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 03:42 AM

Teribus, my error over Prince Philip, he's also Lord High Admiral, does that carry a salary of any note? The people you mention who are "subsidised" by the Queen, who pays for the upkeep of the properties they live in, do they pay a rent do they pay for transport, utilities and the myriad of other expenses that you and I have to fork out for on a daily basis. What the early guest and now myself wish to ascertain is the true cost of sustaining both the immediate and the wider royal family. I for one suspect it is far higher than we are led to believe.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 03:44 AM

Royalist or Roundhead?

Well, the Roundheads buggered up Christmas and didn't hold with the equivalent of folk clubs in their day, whilst the Royalists wore much fancier nice clothes and took pride in their appearance. Scrubbed up well, according to the art galleries.

Anyway, Cromwell paid himself far more than Charles I claimed as a stipend.

In The Indescribablyboring this morning, (the only free on line iPhone newspaper app) there was a letter that agreed that a President where politicians are barred from being appointed seemed a good idea. Also agreed that President Attenborough had a nice ring to it. But President Clarkson?

That's the problem with ruddy democracy. The best system we have but used by gullible impressionable people, or the population as we call them. (Even the Trots can vote apparently.)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 04:15 AM

Agree about the BBC coverage. I did not want to see various celebrities showing off in front of the cameras, or interviews with ordinary spectators waving flags. I wanted to see the Pageant from start to finish. The lack of background knowledge on the part of the presenters was breathtaking. Their commentary was inane. The camera shots kept moving away from interesting moments (eg the Queen's barge coming through Tower Bridge) Wish I had Sky, as my friends said it was excellent!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 10:29 AM

Raggytash & Guest

The sites and the information are all readily available, but:

(1) "he's also Lord High Admiral, does that carry a salary of any note?"

No - the title is purely honourary.


(2) "The people you mention who are "subsidised" by the Queen, who pays for the upkeep of the properties they live in, do they pay a rent do they pay for transport, utilities and the myriad of other expenses that you and I have to fork out for on a daily basis."

They do, they all pay tax even the Queen herself pays tax. If however, they are performing "official duties" they will be trnasported to and from engagements and it required to remain overnight their accommodation will be paid for - they themselves will receive no actual pay for carrying out those duties. I take it that if you or "Guest" were required to attend an interview some distance from where you lived you would expect that the party inviting you to attend would cover your travel expenses, overnight accommodation cost and a per dium allowance for incidental expenses.

(3) "What the early guest and now myself wish to ascertain is the true cost of sustaining both the immediate and the wider royal family. I for one suspect it is far higher than we are led to believe."

The true costs for sustaining the Royal Family are borne entirely out of the income from "The Crown Estate"; "The Duchy of Lancaster" & "The Duchy of Cornwall", they are viewed as tax deductable expenses against the profits generated by those three estates as it worked out last time I checked into the coffers of the Exchequer:

The Crown Estate paid £230million
The Duchy of Lancaster paid £4million
The Duchy of Cornwall paid £8million

That is AFTER all expenses of the Royal Family immediate and wider have been met - They cost the Tax Payer - NOTHING - ZIP - ZERO - NOT ONE BRASS RAZZOO

PS - Hands up all those who have been "working" for the last twenty years without a pay rise??

If we had "Elected" Presidents what would their expenses be?? I believe that they would cost us one hell of a lot more than the present Royal Family does. How many terms would any one President be allowed to serve?? What would their pension (index linked no doubt) be? Security for all for the remainder of their lives? Oh it would all come out of what was formerly The Crown Estate but the net return to the Exchequer would be much lower.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: BrendanB
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 11:32 AM

MtheGM and Don T (and probably many others), please don't be horrible to little Stevie Shaw. His postings are a source of much harmless amusement to me. If you upset him he might take his comfort blanket and go elsewhere. Although he asserts he is never upset the vituperation count goes up significantly when he feels that he has been insulted and for someone who doesn't care what others say about him he seems to keep a remarkably close count of every real or imagined slight. And you have to enjoy his belief that any opinion he holds must be true regardless of any evidence to the contrary.
Don't take him seriously, he does too much of that himself. You don't need to rise to his silliness, he just wants to be noticed. Let's just let him cavort in his 'I know everything' persona; he doesn't matter - and he makes me laugh.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 12:53 PM

Interesting thing there Teribus. The truth can sometimes get in the way of views.

In fact, as the chief marketing tool of UK PLC, it is far more cost effective than any marketing tool that actually costs money... People rattle on about the tourism they pull in as if that is is insignificant, and you know in one way, it is. It is insignificant in terms of the jobs and GDP we get on the back of having them. I used to unashamedly have the Union Jack on our marketing, product leaflets etc for our industrial goods. Considering I find the flying of the flag outside your home to be repugnant, that takes some explaining.

It is because Buy British used to work, and to an extent still does, in emerging markets, especially around the Pacific Rim. I doubt that would be the case if we had an elected president. With all respect, how many crowds would the Irish President draw in Japan or South Korea? Come to think of it, in Dublin?

Mind you, luckily, we were spared having Prince Andrew manning our stand at trade fairs, possibly because we didn't sell arms......

It is easy to be a Republican when you become conditioned to hate everybody above (and below) you in the food chain. That's the problem this country is facing worse than most others. It isn't always nice to go down the pub these days... Egalitarian used to be a noble state to aspire to, but now it just means dumbing down and pretending to celebrate diversity so long as those you celebrate are people who you like to think look up to you.

I'm off to my counting house now to count my money. if you need me, bugger off.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 06:29 PM

""What do you think he imagines he has 'won', do you think?""

"Imagines" is the operative word there Mike, somewhat barren in one who lacks imagination, except in matters of circumventing fact, wouldn't you say?

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 06:46 PM

""MtheGM and Don T (and probably many others), please don't be horrible to little Stevie Shaw. His postings are a source of much harmless amusement to me. If you upset him he might take his comfort blanket and go elsewhere.""

Steve doesn't like being compared to Pete because Pete only believes in God and the Bible. Steve believes in STEVE and that is SO much more important.

Don't worry Brendan, he isn't going anywhere. His ego wouldn't permit him to leave until he is satisfied that he has WON, but he hasn't a clue what the prize is that he is trying to win.

So SSSSssssshhhhhhh! Don't tell him. It's much more fun that way.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: ollaimh
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 07:08 PM

and further more if you vote for me as king, i will convince the acrribean islands of the turks and cacos to join canada . that will raise the canadian average winter temperatures.   so i promise to make canada warmer in the winter!

but i still want a typist

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: ollaimh
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 07:18 PM

common guys my candidatcy will not go viral without some enthusiasm and mass support, this is your chance to jopin the nobility and get a fee(almost) monarch in the bargin.

ok as a last ditch promise as king i promise not to post on mudcat again

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,p
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 04:57 AM

just in from a long shift at work -this conversation has taken a most unpleasant line recently. are there actually a few trolls under a bridge somewhere casting spells and curses on that horrible steve and all the other lefties. is the new king of canada going over the bridge in a cardboard coach and are the BBC failing to make an interesting and incisive documentary about the style and cut of the emperor's 60 year old clothes? get a grip you guys - this is just a conversation, life is just a ride and -of course- we need a world revolution to rid us of the rich and powerful who are killing the planet and stealing anything good from ordinary people everywhere. honestly-it's not rocket science, even for trolls.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 05:11 AM

"Royalist or Roundhead?" Didn't we end up with something in between! The Stuarts (or at least the direct male line) believed in their divine right to rule and in the end it cost them their throne as the last Stuart monarchs (ie the daughters of James VII & II) and the later Hanovarians accepted the idea that royal power had its constitutional limits!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 09:02 AM

The sad thing is that if there was a referendum on the future of Monachy in the UK, the retention of the monachy side would win hands down!
Supporting the Monachy is a vote for a society of deadful immoral extremes.
A society where pensioners die of hyperthermia because of lack of money, and of a royal family with obscene amounts of wealth in land, property, jewellery, art works etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 09:08 AM

The poor are out there, we feel sorry for them, but there it is. The socialists have become very boring about it all.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Will Fly
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 10:39 AM

The poor are out there, we feel sorry for them, but there it is.

... and of course nothing can be done about it except wring our hands and weep crocodile tears...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 10:50 AM

It seems to me that the notion that getting rid of the royals would in itself somehow make a significant contribution towards making us a more equal society is an example of magical thinking. It's like imagining that getting rid of the weathercock on a building would bring it crashing to the ground.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 11:25 AM

Getting rid of royals - and making the reasons for their departure very clear to the populace - would be a big step towards creating a fairer - and much better - society!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 04:26 PM

Getting rid of royals - and making the reasons for their departure very clear to the populace

..would make them demand to know why it was done against there will by an intellectual liberal elite who think they know what is best for them.
You are an anti-democratic fascist.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 05:00 PM

sure-or at least maybe-but there are things that no government can ever -it seems- have a grown up discussion with people about
-
-unilateral disarmament
-inequality and privilege
-who is really running the show?
-raising taxes for things that people need-or like
-prosecuting bankers and other thieves from the 1%
-could our police and armed services be better?
-are families always hard-working?
-legalising drugs
-are engaging, single slackers what make this country great?
-michael gove???
-we don't really need a monarchy, do we?
-workers with pensions-decent folk trying hard in difficult times or scum who must pay for the crimes of the wealthy?
-people with disabilities-scroungers or victims of misfortune?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 05:30 PM

hi boko - 'the poor will always be with us'- maybe - but things could get better if we all make the effort. are a few less than jolly idealists pointing out the obvious really the bigger problem for you?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 05:48 PM

'the poor will always be with us'. That's probably a true statement, But it doesn't have to be like that!
But then I really shouldn't be talking like this; after all I'm simply a mere subject of our wonderful - filthy rich - Queen.

P.S. And I'm governed by a pair of filthy rich politicians!

P.P.S. By the way, isn't there a case for claiming that "God Save the Queen" is sacrilegious?
After all, we all know what Jesus(i.e. God)thought about rich people!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 05:58 PM

It's a great pity that Cliff Richard did not perform with The Shadows, then he might have sung in tune for all the songs he performed at the Jubilee Concert.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 07:01 PM

God save the Queen... and all those that ride on her coattails. If you don't think you do, read some history. I was asked early in this thread to explain myself and I said for readers to watch the TV program about Her Beth and the Jubilee and why "it is". Do that. Read some history. It's not up to me to educate you about what the royal family does for you. Fact is, you detractors can spit and spew all you want. She will continue to do her job, even though you detractors don't even know what she does. Your loss.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Ian Mather sans cookie
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 04:56 AM

One or two on this thread reckon if we abolished the Monarchy, the poor would be lifted from their sad state of being. Oh, and reckoning it wrong that if we voted we would keep them. Or democracy as some of us call it.

Fuck me, heard everything now.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 04:58 AM

i don't think we are short of information about what the queen and her family do, they do get the occasional mention in the media (eg when asked if he was looking forward to getting home for his birthday, prince philip nodded) particularly when there is a positive side to the story. whereas the real extent of the political influence of this randomly selected family or the travel costs and 'business' details of andrew's 'job' tend to be a bit less open to discussion. while they may well work hard in what they perceive of us 'our' interests, this is not the point. which is they represent a system based on inherited influence and wealth. here, they are a family who are clearly presented as better than the rest of us, no matter how they behave we must remain loyal and entreat god to intervene on their behalf. i'd say there are many millions more people who could do with a bit of help -the royals can manage fine. if they just toned down the lavish spending a bit - and does anyone need more than one huge london home and a country retreat - did proper jobs and encouraged 'their' people to believe that everyone in the uk is equally valuable etc.....we could all have a more adult and friendly relationship with the windsors. (i am better than no-one and no-one is better than me - she could put it on our christmas cards)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:56 AM

...which is they represent a system based on inherited influence and wealth.

They certainly do, but as well as representing it they spearhead it and legitimise it. They make it more possible for the House Of Lords to get stuffed with brainless toffs. They give credibility to the accelerated privilege of public school attendees and help to ensure that the cabinet, the City, the "elite" universities and the upper echelons of the armed forces will always be dominated by them. Their vast holdings of land and property implicitly justify the exploitation of the people who do the real work for the big landlords, who are the laziest, greediest, most useless and most damaging people in the country. In fact, they legitimise greed itself.The royals make all these things that much more possible and that much more difficult to oppose. They have the money, the power, the pageantry and the lackeys to put on grand shows that make them look the benign symbols that they are most assuredly not. Loving the royals is similar in many ways to believing in God: it requires a complete suspension of critical examination.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 07:13 AM

Exactly!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 07:15 AM

Keith A ......... surely you are not suggesting that by supporting Royalty we are truly supporting democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 07:40 AM

"It's not up to me to educate you about what the royal family does for you"

Without being rude, are you in a position to tell the people that live in the UK, pay part their portion of taxable income to the monarchy, who read about them every day, are taught about them in school, see them on TV virtually every day, in the papers every day, are familiar with their history both ancient and modern, hear them expound their views, follow their careers, their relationships, visit their homes, live amongst 1500 years of history that includes much strife and war, and are directly linked to that history?

Somehow, I think not.

Many people in the UK might disagree about the worth of the Royal Family, have various opinions about whether they should be paid for by taxes, land ownership etc, but every opinion is as valid as the next whether you like (or understand) the debate or not. The casual viciousness that has been demonstrated by some posters on this thread is regrettable, but that says more about them than anyone else.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:09 AM

Keith A ......... surely you are not suggesting that by supporting Royalty we are truly supporting democracy.

YES.
In a true democracy, the people should choose what kind of democracy they want.
If we have a large majority who favour our popular and successful constitutional monarchy, it would be undemocratic for an arrogant liberal elite to decide that they can not have it.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:12 AM

How do you know there is a large majority? Guess? What you see on the telly? Or have you conducted a referendum?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:33 AM

"after all I'm simply a mere subject of our wonderful - filthy rich - Queen." - Tunesmith

Ah Tunesmith I take from that totally incorrect statement that you do not possess a British Passport.

If you did hold one you could open it up at the personal information page and see clearly that under the Title - Nationality - it states:

BRITISH CITIZEN

Sugarfoot Jack what potion of our taxable income gets paid to the monarchy??

The Monarchy is not paid for by taxes. You and others keep banging on about this and keep trotting out this MYTH Perhaps you could come up with some form of subtantive proof that they are "paid for" through taxes. I will not hold my breath waiting for you to provide it.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:39 AM

Well, there is a very strong anti-Monarchy feeling in the country but when is that voice heard?
Well, hardly ever, is the answer!
The truth is that the public's view of the Monarchy is generally shaped by the media, and the media is constantly telling the Queen's subjects how wonderful the Monarchy is( The media, of course, love the royals because they sell newspapers!- lots of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:52 AM

And, shamefully, 'tis the Beeb who seem to be the main cheerleaders these days. Not only do they lavishly "do" all the royal events, commentated on routinely by bunches of cheerily-inane sycophants, but they do lots of extra programmes about 'em too. Why, there was another one on only last night about "William at 30" or something which was about as buttock-clenching as you could wish for (at least, the five-minute chunk of it that I actually saw was). Speaking of the Beeb and buttocks, the former has a "royal correspondent", Nicholas Witchell, who appears to permanently reside up the Queen's latters.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:58 AM

How do you know there is a large majority? Guess?

No.
Reliable opinion polls.
Also, a million people stood in the freezing rain and wind on Sunday to see a load of unremarkable boats and the Queen.
The Republican protest at Tower Bridge could only raise sixty sad sacks.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:01 AM

the British public's support for the country remaining a monarchy is at a record high level according to Ipsos MORI's special Diamond Jubilee poll. Eight in ten (80%) British adults favour Britain remaining a monarchy compared to 13% that want to see it becoming a republic.

Support for the monarchy is highest among older generations, with almost nine in ten (88%) of those aged 55+ saying Britain should remain a monarchy. Conservative supporters are most likely to be monarchists – 96% prefer Britain to have a monarch rather than become a republic compared to three-quarters (74%) of Labour supporters and 84% of Liberal Democrats.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:14 AM

"The Monarchy is not paid for by taxes."

Well, according to the ever-reliable wikipedia: "Only the Queen officially receives direct funding from the Civil List. The Queen's consort (Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh) receives £359,000 per year. The Queen, as head of state, receives £7,900,000 from the Civil List to defray some of the official expenditure of the monarchy."

Er, isn't this funded by the Treasury? It looks like Gideon is about to give the poor, cash-strapped old dears a bit more too.


Keith: The boats were excellent (as I said earlier), and funded privately. Wonderful sight. Thanks for the Mori poll figures. Just wondered how you knew. I didn't see the republican display, I was at our village street party, doing my bit. Were you involved at all?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:20 AM

A million Brits stood in the rain and wind. Fifty-nine million Brits did not. Far more than that number stood in the cold to protest against the impending Iraq war in the spring of 2003, yet I remember pro-war commentators at the time making the exact same point as I just have. A million turned up to see the pope in Ireland too. Cor.

But yes, the royals are enjoying popularity at present. They always get a bit more popular when they have a wedding or jubilee shindig (boosting their popularity is the whole point of such functions, lest we forget. The pyramid of privilege must be maintained!) But it's a slightly dangerous game, projecting, even implicitly, from favourable polls that the royals are A Good Thing. 74% of Brits are in favour of the death penalty. Hmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:34 AM

I don't know - of course - how many Americans might be following this current debate, but would any of them wish to have a monarchy?
To be a subject of a king or queen rather that a citizen of a democracy?
To bow down to someone who is "clearly better/superior" to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:50 AM

To be a subject of a king or queen rather that a citizen of a democracy?
We are both!
To bow down to someone who is "clearly better/superior" to you.
No-one has to. They do it out of respect.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 11:45 AM

To Keith: Both? Speak for yourself!

And what exactly has Her Maj ever done to earn my respect? She owns land that her ancestors stole from my ancestors, and, to add insult to injury, keeps me off most of it. She spends my tax money (not to speak of the Beeb wasting my licence fee on her bloody ceremonial nonsenses!) on a massive four-day jolly. Like all unelected monarchs and dictators the world over, she is rich beyond our wildest dreams by dint of the impoverishment of other people, either by landlordism or via her crooked ancestry. There's no other way of getting to be that rich.

Note that the monarchy will not foot the bill for the latest shindig. We taxpayers gave her a cool extra million towards it. The GLA spent 600 grand on stewards and big video screens. The police and military provided massive support (not to speak of all that ceremonial nonsense) which must have cost the taxpayer millions (but you try finding out how much and who pays!) Those Red Arrows used more than a gallon or two as well, I'll be bound. Then there's the extra bank holiday. Another cool billion. ATOS will have to up their game robbing the sick to make that lot up! Oh yes, it costs us dear to help the royals maintain their popularity all right. Do they deserve respect for that? They do not in my book. Do I resent the cost? Yep, every single penny!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 12:08 PM

Among many strong arguments against monarchism, it's definitely better for a nation's head of state to be examined and voted in - AND out when the process of ageing, etc., means that another can easily do better; thus, as suggested above, it's disappointing the way American Republicans and Democrats hypocritically support the Windsors.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: BrendanB
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 12:10 PM

I don't have any strong feelings for or against the monarchy but one or two thoughts occur. The last time this country tried going without a monarchy it didn't last very long before the restoration took place but perhaps things would be different if we tried again, different folks, different strokes as they say. However, I seem to recall that it wasn't long before Oliver Cromwell was requiring more money from Parliament than Charles I had ever done.
We need a head of state if our version of democracy is to continue. I suspect that an elected head of state would be driven by ambition (even greed) which could place his or her wishes over the best interests of the country. We only have to look at recent revelations about our politicians to see that. S/he could also demand greater powers because of the popular mandate inherent in having been elected. A hereditary monarch can make no such claim.
I don't know much about the way the monarchy is funded but I have a gut feeling that too much money is spent on royals who contribute little or nothing to the country. Where that money comes from I don't know but IMO people like Prince Andrew and Prince Edward really should be earning their own money rather than receiving handouts. Apart from anything else it would set an example which I believe is one of the things we can expect of the royal family (I did say expect, even if we don't get it).

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 12:46 PM

From an article I reead, very little got paid to stewards, accomodation under London Bridge, and provided food consisting of a sandwich in a paper bag - and no wages. It would be nore appropriate to complain about the money paid to the company that provided the stewards

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 01:27 PM

I don't have any strong feelings for or against the monarchy

Why not?


We only have to look at recent revelations about our politicians to see that.

Well yes, a minority of MPs fiddled their expenses claims because a very lax system allowed them to do so. I once claimed overnight meals and accommodation and rail fares for an interview I attended, which I drove to and back from on the same day, taking a flask and sandwiches. The claim form was a no-questions-asked-no-receipts job. What a naughty boy I was! I was very annoyed about those MPs, just like everybody else, but let's not get carried away. We taxpayers have just cheerfully handed over God knows how many more times that amount so that the richest woman in the world can have a four-day party and embed herself even more deeply in the affections of the gullible. If you don't feel strongly about the royals, you sure as hell can't be feeling too strongly about those politicos either.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 01:36 PM

a."there is a very strong anti-Monarchy feeling in the country but when is that voice heard?" ~~ Tunesmith

b. "The media, of course, love the royals because they sell newspapers!- lots of them." ~~ ditto: later same post

.,.,

If 'a', then why 'b'? Where are the anti-monarchist papers that sell millions to those who hold the 'very strong feeling' ref'd to in 'a'?

I think you & your lot might just be a teenyweeny itsybitsy bit confused, Tunesmith dear.

Nezza mind; dear dear; diddums!

〠☺〠~M~〠☺〠

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 02:30 PM

Hope - Nepal, a monarchy when I visited, is now the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 03:17 PM

MthGM, well, it's simple - but just for you - I'll spell it out nice and plainly.

In Britain we have dozens of celeb mags and they sell like crazy.

Why? Probably because lots of people feel celebrities lead a far more exciting life than them and want a glimpse into - what they perceive as - their rich glittering world.

And, I've no doubt, these "celeb lovers" bathe warmly in the reflected glow of these "super people".

Right, got it so far? Celebrity sells!

Now the Queen is the biggest celebrity in the country.
Are you still with me?

Now - this bit might challenge you, but hang in there!

So the papers feed their readers lots of glamorous stories of the Queen and her wonderful family.

Still there MthGM?

The public gobble it up and want more and more.

And, boy do they get more.

If we got rid of the Queen, how would all people get their "fantasy fixes"?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:05 PM

This business about "I want to be a citizen not a subject" really is a bit of a bore. If you're British,you're a British Citizen. The fact that the country has a hereditary monarchy is irrelevant. If the monarchy were to be abolished tomorrow they'd still be citizens - and if the monarchy were restored the next day, they'd still be citizens.

The same applies to Australians and Canadians and so forth. All citizens of their respective countries.

There are arguments for dispensing with the hereditary monarchy - but stuff about citizens and subjects are completely irrelevant and just get in the way of any sensible discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:23 PM

"A million Brits stood in the rain and wind. Fifty-nine million Brits did not."

Ah so you accept the same argument as being equally indicative with regard to the anti-war protesters do you Steve?

"Well, according to the ever-reliable wikipedia: "Only the Queen officially receives direct funding from the Civil List. The Queen's consort (Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh) receives £359,000 per year. The Queen, as head of state, receives £7,900,000 from the Civil List to defray some of the official expenditure of the monarchy."

Er, isn't this funded by the Treasury?"

It WAS funded by the Treasury - a Treasury that receives £242million from "The Crown Estate"; "The Duchy of Lancaster" & "The Duchy of Cornwall" now tell me how much you contributed through your taxes to the £7.9million??

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:40 PM

And what exactly has Her Maj ever done to earn my respect?
As I said Steve, no-one has to bow.
People who do, do it because they want to.
You are free not to Steve, so what is your point?
Would you make it an offence to show respect to the Queen?

You are a sad man Steve.
To favour a republic is a perfectly respectable view, but you are obsessed.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:41 PM

"Treasury that receives £242million from "The Crown Estate..."

Really? Are you saying that they pay taxes? More taxes than the receive in "income" from the public coffers?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:45 PM

No I do not. I take the manifestation of the point as made by Keith to be the mark of a double standard. Keith may well have opposed the invasion of Iraq - how would I know - but people just like Keith would have taken the one-million-out vs. 59 million stay-at-homes as evidence that we wanted that war. That's all. Anyone wishing to take the one million on the banks of the Thames (police estimate: 50,000 ;-))as a sure sign that the whole nation wants the monarchy had better remember Red Robbo and his show-of-hands ballots in the 70s...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:46 PM

That was to Teribus.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:59 PM

Well, it's very nice of the Crown to contribute £242 million to the Treasury. But the Crown Estate, and all the other royal holdings, belong to the nation, if you care to go back far enough. They were all stolen from the ordinary people of this country by the ancestors of those who hold them now, and are now used, landlordistically, to further fleece the people they were stolen from. Tell us what proportion of the total income of the Crown Estate et al. £242 million is. That would be quite revealing - and quite small. But you'll never be able to find out. Ask yourself why. Then calculate what the take would be if the Crown Estate et al. were fairly divided among ordinary, hard-working, honest, tax-paying people who couldn't, or wouldn't, afford armies of accountants to minimise the tax take of the state. Why, we could probably pay off all of Spain's debts!

Any man who is sad because he disagrees with you is, indeed, a very happy man, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 06:26 PM

Well said, Tunesmith. Those who measure the popularity of the royals by the numbers of royalty-supporting tabloids peddled had better remember that tabloid sales also crucially depend on the amounts of naked dolly-bird titties and naked dolly-bird arses they can legally get away with portraying, as well as the number of celebrity sex scandals they can stuff their pages with. Slagging off disabled benefits claimants and the housing benefit claimant victims of avaricious London landlords also sell well. Not to speak of veiled, or not so veiled, calls to send immigrants, especially black ones, "back to where they came from" (though sending black people back to Canning Town would seem to be slightly pointless...). Oh yes, support of the royals fits very well indeed with all these other oh-so-desirable tabloid policies! Pile 'em high 'n' sell 'em cheap!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 06:32 PM

So, let me try to understand. The Queen owns everything, including the land I am typing from (if I don't pay my rent (taxes) she takes it back). She pays a shitload to the treasury and she gets little back in comparison according to posts above. She brokers contacts all over the world among royalty and elite and politicians. She gets shit done. She directs the military of Britain and other countries in support of Brit companies who dominate the world's oil and food supplies.

Seems to me... I wouldn't fuck with the "Royals". I think I would wave the flag.... and pay my taxes.

Now, is all my conjecture a load of shit? Well, I watched The Jubilee celebrations. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, eh what? Any of you detractors getting a flypast by the ROYAL Air Force? God save YOUR Queen if you don't. Piss and moan all you want... it ain't gonna change the way the world works. She owns your ass and yer lucky she does.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 06:37 PM

Pass around your smoke, old chap. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 07:32 PM

While you pass gas?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 07:35 PM

From the lower end only, old bean, unlike your good self. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 07:56 PM

""... and of course nothing can be done about it except wring our hands and weep crocodile tears...""

O.K. Will, let's assume that you are right.

When we strip the Monarchy of all their property, land and money, sell it and distribute the proceeds equally among the poor, two questions arise.

1. What will you spend your five quid on?

2. How will all the newly unemployed ex workers of the Duchy of Cornwall and the Crown Estates avoid starvation?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:07 PM

""Without being rude, are you in a position to tell the people that live in the UK, pay part their portion of taxable income to the monarchy, who read about them every day, are taught about them in school, see them on TV virtually every day, in the papers every day, are familiar with their history both ancient and modern, hear them expound their views, follow their careers, their relationships, visit their homes, live amongst 1500 years of history that includes much strife and war, and are directly linked to that history?""

Do you know, I rather think that the answer to your question is YES! HE IS!

The reason being that he is observing the situation much more objectively than any Anti-Monarchist Brit who starts from a position of envy and inverted snobbery.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:14 PM

""Many people in the UK might disagree about the worth of the Royal Family, have various opinions about whether they should be paid for by taxes, land ownership etc, but every opinion is as valid as the next whether you like (or understand) the debate or not.""

And one or two of those people might one day, if hit sufficiently hard on the head, be able to absorb the fact that they are not paid for by taxes, but put much more tax revenue into the economy than (for reasons of cash flow and National ownership of most of the property supposed by the ignorant to be owned by them) they receive from it.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:16 PM

God save The Queen and all who sail with her. The rest of you can find jobs in China. Don't forgrt to write home.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:24 PM

""Why, there was another one on only last night about "William at 30" or something which was about as buttock-clenching as you could wish for (at least, the five-minute chunk of it that I actually saw was).""

I had wondered how anybody spouting such asinine drivel could possibly be so totally ignorant of anything factual regarding the topic.

Now I begin to understand. The sum total of your knowledge of the Monarchy is based in five minute chunks before you change channels or switch off your TV.

Terrific!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:33 PM

Well, Don, I suppose that, instead of putting them in prison, you could have harnessed the talents of the Kray twins and generated even more revenue. I find it somewhat odd that the generation of revenue is, somehow, seen as justification for the existence of this anachronistic bunch of parasites. We could set up a massive nationalised network of prostitution and generate a ton of revenue. I'm confident that a programme of public hangings would also yield a good few quid for the Treasury, given reasonable ticket prices. The justification for the continued existence of the royals by virtue of their money-making prowess is, er, somewhat amoral, eh, Don? A bit on the expedient side, shall we say?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:33 PM

newly unemployed workers in cornwall could decide to run the posh jam business themselves, so cutting out the middlemen. or just do what the rest of those of us who have known unemployment do.....sign on and try to have a laugh while doing it. (again) are sometime unemployed, sometimes single old hippies and young idealists what make this country good? they are certainly a lot more use than city thieves, and inbred nice-but-dim types. jarvis cocker or prince andrew? eliza carthy or diana sloan? jo brand or anne widdecombe? john cooper clarke or anyone?
joe strummer or paul mccartney? john martyn or gideon osborne?(yes,i realize this is a rather bizarre choice, but you get my point.....)my son (who is great) and prince william (same age and really useless) who is a human...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:36 PM

""
"Treasury that receives £242million from "The Crown Estate..."

Really? Are you saying that they pay taxes? More taxes than the receive in "income" from the public coffers? ""

Yes Gnu, that is exactly what he is saying and it is true.

Moreover, the queen herself is legally exempt from taxation and makes her payment voluntarily.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:40 PM

(obviously) there is nothing special or different about folk born into the royal family-they are just (very fortunate) people like the rest of us. except not quite as bright.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:40 PM

Ah, that was aimed at Don's penultimate post (I wish!), not the last one. Apropos of my watching a five-minute chunk of royal fluff on the telly, it was more than enough to see clearly enough what was going on. There wasn't actually much, er, depth there, shall we say. Actually, I think that most people who saw it would consider that watching as much as five minutes of it is worthy of a medal.   


Did you see the prog, Don? You're going to say yes, aren't you? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:44 PM

Moreover, the queen herself is legally exempt from taxation and makes her payment voluntarily.

Gosh, she's our hero then, innit! The richest woman in the world has a choice as to whether she pays her tax or not, and Don makes a virtue of it! Bwahahahaha!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:58 PM

""That's all. Anyone wishing to take the one million on the banks of the Thames (police estimate: 50,000 ;-))as a sure sign that the whole nation wants the monarchy had better remember Red Robbo and his show-of-hands ballots in the 70s...""

Remember mister that the TV audience for the Thames jubilee celebrations was estimated at over One Billion (one in six, or 16.7% of the world's population).

The tribute on Friday by Prince Charles pulled in 7.27 million viewers
The "William at 30" documentary you so despise pulled 6.1 million
The Concert 17 million.

You would seem to be underestimating more than somewhat. What a surprise!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:10 PM

""(yes,i realize this is a rather bizarre choice, but you get my point.....)my son (who is great) and prince william (same age and really useless) who is a human...""

Do you really think your son would have the aptitude or the talent to replace that useless human....(what?) over the mountains of Snowdonia in a Sea King rescue helicopter in winter with the cloud base at 400 feet, preserving the lives of good strapping "salt of the Earth" working types who haven't the sense to stay away in bad weather?

I don't think so!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 11:45 PM

Stev.
(police estimate: 50,000 ;-))

Queen's Diamond Jubilee Thames pageant: A very British way to honour Her Majesty
Daily Mailý - 6 days agoBBC News - Diamond Jubilee Thames Pageant cheered by crowdswww.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18312403Cached

3 Jun 2012 – More than one million rain-soaked people have watched the Queen's 1000-boat Diamond Jubilee pageant weave its way along the Thames, ...
A Million Line The Thames For Queen's Pageant - Yahoo! News UKuk.news.yahoo.com/thames-set-host-jubilee-river-pageant-00374799...Cached

3 Jun 2012 – 'A Million Line The Thames For Queen's Pageant' on Yahoo! ... Some 1.2 million people gathered in central London to watch the pageant and ...
Anglia afloat at the Thames Pageant | Anglia - ITV Newswww.itv.com/news/anglia/2012.../anglia-afloat-at-the-thames-pageant...Cached

6 days ago – Read the latest Anglia stories, Anglia afloat at the Thames Pageant on ... It's estimated 1.25 million people watched the huge flotilla sail down ...
More than one million people expected to line the Thames today For ...www.people.co.uk/.../more-than-one-million-people-expected-to-line...Cached

►► news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16240368
2 Jun 2012
Some 1.2 million people gathered in central London to watch the pageant and cheer ...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 12:46 AM

"Are you saying that they pay taxes? More taxes than the receive in "income" from the public coffers?"

All members of the Royal Family pay tax.

As to your other question is 242 a bigger number than 7.9 - Quite simple really and even easier to look up and get confirmed by some pretty authorative sources. None-the-less when the next discussion about the British Royal Family comes up we will get the same old "Myths" being trotted out.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 05:50 AM

Good job HM doesn't come across as repugnant as some of her detractors eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 06:11 AM

Well, Don, I turned the telly on for a little while and saw the inane bobbing up and down to the Sailor's Hornpipe, so I suppose I get counted too. And I watched the concert. Neither of those viewing experiences marks me out as a royalist, I assure you, and I doubt that I'm alone.

Yes, 242 is bigger than 7.9 (though your figure should be 32, not 7.9, but we'll let that pass for now). But the thing is that it's all our money anyway. The royals, with their 242 million, are giving us back what is already ours. Break up those vast estates and give the land to thousands of hard-working, honest individuals who don't employ massed ranks of top accountants and you'd multiply that tax take of 242 million by a good few times, I reckon. Unless you trust the royal playboys and girls over the ordinary working people of the country, of course. I know who I trust more.

HM "doesn't come across as repugnant" simply because she doesn't come across as anything at all. Or, at best, a scarcely smiling, hand-waving, white-gloved old doll.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 08:10 AM

don - i'm trying to point out that my son, william, you me or anyone else really are just people doing the best we can with what we have. i am sure my son would not be able to fly a helicopter as he's not had the training (he could manage the smiling and waving bits though) but would william have the ability to get by on £65 a week and still be a positive and resourceful guy, making every effort to find another job and making his own music while volunteering in the community. nor could william teach him anything about music (he worked for years in record shops) - probably we would differ about who is more useful to society as a whole. but i would take music as far more beneficial than monarchy or military.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Will Fly
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 08:24 AM

Don - in response to your post of a day or two ago, in which you wrote:

O.K. Will, let's assume that you are right.

When we strip the Monarchy of all their property, land and money, sell it and distribute the proceeds equally among the poor, two questions arise.

1. What will you spend your five quid on?

2. How will all the newly unemployed ex workers of the Duchy of Cornwall and the Crown Estates avoid starvation?

Don T.

This was in response to my retort to Bonzo, which went as follows:

Bonzo: The poor are out there, we feel sorry for them, but there it is.

Me: ... and of course nothing can be done about it except wring our hands and weep crocodile tears...

You obviously missed what I had written in an earlier post:

I'm with Richard [Bridge] in that a hereditary head of state, such as we have now, seems a reasonable figurehead to represent the country.

You wrongly conflated my response to Bonzo with some of the anti-monarchical, strip-the-monarchy-of its riches posts in this thread. I was merely making the point, in my riposte to Bonzo's vapid sentences, that - given the will and the humanity and the commitment - some of the inequities in our society can be changed. I'm not suggesting that we parcel out Royal property to the population as a whole. BUT - if we have the wit and the will and the intelligence and the necessary "go" to, say, wage wars in places like Iraq and Aghanistan - if we also have similar intelligence and resources for other projects which (for example) bring work to people without work - then it's possible. What's needed is the motivation and an underlying assumption that it's worth doing.

Here's a random example - probably impractical but worth a second's thought: How about giving tax incentives to firms who employ call centre staff in this country rather than places like India, thus giving work to our people and supporting a local service?

I'm not an anti-monarchist but - given the growing imbalances in our society - I would personally prefer expenditure on, say, the scale of the Swedish monarchy. Anything is possible given the will.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 08:25 AM

Wonderful photos of Jubilee events in the Telegraph magazine this weekend.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 09:58 AM

Problem is Will, if the balance sheet for our Monarchy was the same for the Swedish Monarchy, there'd be a hell of a lot less money available for the social programs we need money for.

In times of perceived hardship, it is obvious to look for scapegoats. The growing imbalances won't be alleviated by killing the goose that lays golden eggs, (or diamond eggs as of now.)

The history of serfdom and Barons leading to today's constitutional Monarchy is an interesting one and contains much that would be abhorrent now. But we are where we are, and the wit, will and intelligence you refer to would keep this institution as a net asset.

You are not an anti monarchist, and I am not a monarchist, but on this particular debate, we need to be realists.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 10:22 AM

""probably we would differ about who is more useful to society as a whole. but i would take music as far more beneficial than monarchy or military.""

You may be right, but I'd hate to tell a casualty 2000 feet up Capel Curig that I was sending out a guitarist and a DJ to rescue him.

Unlike the detractors on this thread, I am not belittling anybody, least of all your son. I am simply trying to point out the malicious fallacy and myth, perpetrated by idiots who think that:

1. Rich=Stupid
2. Privileged=Inbred
3. Tory=Posh, avaricious and dishonest.

The answers or course are:

1. There are stupid people who are poor, and there are rich people who are highly intelligent.
2. The Royal family are not inbred, and never have been. They live under the same cultural and legal restrictions as the rest of us. The gene pool of aristocratic families throughout Europe and beyond is amply large enough for strong genetic lines and there have been insertions of new genes with various commoner marriages.
3. This is the most stupid assertion of all. It is a claim that over one third of this country's voters are Posh, avaricious and dishonest.

These fallacies amount to proof that those who diseminate them should be considered too stupid to be qualified to vote.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 10:22 AM

And that was 300

DT

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 10:38 AM

I love the way Don "doesn't belittle anybody" in his posts. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 10:53 AM

"3. Tory=Posh, avaricious and dishonest."

Not quite correct Don:

Tory = Selfish, truculent, mistrustful.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 12:40 PM

Just as bad Jack, and equally inaccurate.

I could as easily claim that Tory = intelligent enough to know that every Labour government since Attlee left the scene has done its best to destroy the country and come bloody close to succeeding, while the Tories have had to spend the first two years of every term clearing up the Labour quagmire, except for poor old Heath, who was handed the poison chalice of all time, and had no chance at all.

That, incidentally, is what Brown intended for Cameron, but the LibDems got in the way.

As for belittling people, I was referring to those human beings who exhibit some vestige of basic good manners.

Sorry Steve, but you don't qualify, and will get no more responses from me, though I can't promise there'll be no oblique digs such as you regularly employ.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 01:00 PM

"Yes, 242 is bigger than 7.9 (though your figure should be 32, not 7.9, but we'll let that pass for now)."

Hell as like we'll let it go Steve because you are wrong again of course.

The Cost of the Royal Family is as you say £32million - how is it made up??

£7.9 million - Civil List Payment
£24.1 million - From the gross profit from the Duchy of Lancaster and from the gross profit of the Duchy of Cornwall, plus whatever the Government have to chip in to THEIR buildings and property in order.

All profit from the Crown Estate goes to the Exchequer which by the way is NOT YOUR MONEY - That accounts for £230million

The net profit from the Duchy of Lancaster goes to the Exchequer which by the way is NOT YOUR MONEY - There's another £4million

The net profit from the Duchy of Cornwall goes to the Exchequer which by the way is NOT YOUR MONEY - There's another £8million

Then of course you have the personal taxes paid at 50% by a group of very rich people. What was the figure again about 5% of the population (the wealthiest) in the country pay about 45% of all tax collected

OK shagger what did you pay in tax last year??
How much did you raise for Charity??

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 04:10 PM

God Save the Queen, and bring back Empire Day!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 05:41 PM

don - you are right,of course some rich people are clever and some poorer folk are dim. but with the royal family, despite having the 'best' education money can buy and every possible advantage they just don't seem particularly bright, have few original opinions or have any particular talent. i don't want to knock them, they are just folk getting by with their lives - but i don't feel they deserve wealth, power,adulation and millions of sycophantic subjects devoted to them. well, no more than any of us deserve it.

i wouldn't choose the adjectives mentioned to describe the tories - but if you are well-off, you know they will look after your interests at the expense of everyone else - so greedy comes into it.
for the rest of people who don't have anything to gain financially by voting for the bosses' party, well - stupid is the word that comes to mind. we all need decent schools, a proper health service and will at some points in our lives rely on a good pension and a supportive welfare state. i'm not saying that labour can be relied on here but to vote tory in these circumstances is like the proverbial turkeys voting for christmas.
it seems for some people voting tory will make them feel more 'posh' - just deluded.
i could add mean-spirited, xenophobic, little england racists,though that may be a little harsh. However, if you are a tory these days -you are highly likely to be english -or lonely. scots certainly never bought that thatcherite nonsense.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 08:21 PM

The profits from those estates is really our money because those estates were once land owned in common by the British people, later to be stolen by force by the ancestors of the people who own it now. Another point is that those estates are run very inefficiently by people just playing around with their ill-gained power. The profits are shamefully low, and would be far greater were the land to be run efficiently by people with real personal investment in it, instead of by rich playboys who are far more interested in horses, foxes, grouse and pheasants than they are in real people.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 08:33 PM

I could as easily claim that Tory = intelligent enough to know that every Labour government since Attlee left the scene has done its best to destroy the country and come bloody close to succeeding

I actually took you to be very old, Don, but you're clearly not old enough to remember that it was Labour who gave us the NHS (OK, Atlee, but the bloody Tories would never have done it!), Labour who gave us comprehensive education, Labour who developed the welfare state, Labour who, even under Blair, not exactly my favourite man, slashed hospital waiting lists, revolutionised nursery education and introduced the minimum wage. And that it was the Tories, under Thatcher, who destroyed the industrial base of this country, threw millions on the scrapheap, wrecked whole communities in working class areas and deregulated the banks in a move that sowed the seed for the present crisis. Oh yes, Labour didn't exactly put it all right, but the analysis represented by your sentence above is, well, a quaint view of recent history, to put it mildly.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 08:55 PM

OK shagger what did you pay in tax last year??

Heheh. "Shagger." I paid in tax last year exactly what the tax rules said I should pay. No accountant has ever reduced my tax bill. As for what I give to charity, something you've attempted to raise several times now, the answer is that I give what I give and, not only is it nowt to do with you nor this thread, even my left hand knoweth not what my right hand doeth. Why don't you go along to some homeless blokes under Waterloo Bridge and ask them what they paid in tax last year or how much they gave to charity? When they tell you how little it is, you can then tell them that, as it isn't enough, or it's less than you or the Queen give, they are not entitled to their opinions! Would you like us all to pass a minimum tax-paying threshold before we can post/write letters to papers/vote? In other words, what are you on about?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 12:33 AM

1: The profits from those estates is really our money because those estates were once land owned in common by the British people, later to be stolen by force by the ancestors of the people who own it now.

When were those estates owned in common by the British people?? Answer to that of course is NEVER, the land always "belonged" by those who defended it.

When were those lands "stolen" by force from the British people??
As an answer to that please, please, please come back and tell us all about the Norman conquest - on that point in terms of fact and history I will bury any idiotic argument you put forward.

What British people are you referring to??

2: "Another point is that those estates are run very inefficiently by people just playing around with their ill-gained power."

Wrong again Steve, those three concerns number amongst the best run property management and business porfolios in the country - fact. To establish that all you have to do is look at their balance sheets, look at how the worth of those estates have grown. Oh by the bye the Royals do not "run" those concerns and have no say in who does. You really should educate yourself with regard to the subject you are discussing. Try approach it from knowledge, not ill-informed tooth-sucking envy.

3: "I paid in tax last year exactly what the tax rules said I should pay."

How public spirited of you - The Royal Family pays more - and those who are legally not obliged to pay tax pay it voluntarily.

4. As far as Charity goes you give what you give - well done. The fact that you cannot put a figure to it indicates like most you just throw a few coins or possibly notes into collecting tins every now and then. Collectively the members of the Royal Family give their names, time and money to over 3,500 Charities.

5. "they are not entitled to their opinions!"

The homeless under Waterloo Bridge are perfectly entitled to their opinions and are free to express themselves - The Royal Family on the other hand are not.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 03:55 AM

"As an answer to that please, please, please come back and tell us all about the Norman conquest - on that point in terms of fact and history I will bury any idiotic argument you put forward."

Gawd, who'd a thought it? Teribus, great defender of the Norman invaders? I thought you were on our side?

Pray enlighten us in what way the Normans were right to invade a sovereign nation with a named and chosen successor, steal the land (as is the way with conquerors) and re-distribute it amongst a few knights, and most importantly (don't duck this one Tezza lad) how the slaughter of innocent people and the laying waste of parts of the country was justified*




*Remember - these were the people that actually lived and farmed here.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Will Fly
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 04:02 AM

The homeless under Waterloo Bridge are perfectly entitled to their opinions and are free to express themselves - The Royal Family on the other hand are not.

Just one point here: Prince Charles has expressed his many and varied opinions openly on many an occasion - architecture, medicine. He also actively, and behind the scenes, sends of many letters - sometimes several a week to government ministers, advocating his point of view on this and that. This has been documented and recorded in the press on several occasions. Whether his opinions are acceptable or make any sense I leave to others to comment on. The point is that he is abusing his position as a prominent member of the Royal Family in doing so. Interference in plans for the building on the Chelsea Barracks site is one example.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 05:29 AM

3: "I paid in tax last year exactly what the tax rules said I should pay."

How public spirited of you - The Royal Family pays more - and those who are legally not obliged to pay tax pay it voluntarily.

Abiding by the law of the land and not trying to evade tax, as the royal estates endeavour to do, what with their armies of accountants, is not "public spirited": it's just what normal people do.

4. As far as Charity goes you give what you give - well done. The fact that you cannot put a figure to it indicates like most you just throw a few coins or possibly notes into collecting tins every now and then. Collectively the members of the Royal Family give their names, time and money to over 3,500 Charities.

Well there's a nice spot of prejudice for you. You haven't the faintest idea what I give or how I give it (though I will declare that I don't stuff money into rattled tins). You disagree with me so you automatically suppose that I don't give. Actually, giving to charity is hardly what this thread is supposed to be about. I'm not about to tell you or anyone else what I give, to who and how. I might well be an atheist but I'm very Jesus when it comes to this. And, as with the taxes the royals so valiantly pay, what they give to charities is only money that they have no moral right to.   

5. "they are not entitled to their opinions!"

The homeless under Waterloo Bridge are perfectly entitled to their opinions and are free to express themselves - The Royal Family on the other hand are not.

Except that homeless people have no platform for expressing their opinions, of course, unlike the royals, whose every pronouncement is lionised in the media. As I said before, the Queen, for all her stunted intellect (not to speak of stunted personality) at least has the good sense to shut up and stick to the script. This can hardly be said for her buffoon son, or her husband, much-lauded for his "acerbic wit," which, translated into honest language, comes out as boorish ignorance tinged with a healthy dose of irony-free xenophobia.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 05:48 AM

It's a waste of time sorting out where to start in demolishing this total bullshit, represented as fact without one iota of evidence to back any of it up.

It is pure fantasy emanating from a stunted personality whose bias is equalled only by the size of his ego.

Teribus, it's all yours mate, and good luck with it. You would get more reasoned responses conversing with a brick.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 06:32 AM

'"acerbic wit," which, translated into honest language, comes out as boorish ignorance '

.,,.,.

Tu quoque, Shaw. Something of a know-thyself post there, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 09:02 AM

Well, the, I never claimed to possess acerbic wit and I don't claim it now. As for boorishness, anyone here can see for themselves, if they have time to waste, that the insults emanating from the keyboards of yerself and dear old Don far outweigh mine. Cast out the plank from thine own eye!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 10:56 AM

"Pray enlighten us in what way the Normans were right to invade a sovereign nation with a named and chosen successor, steal the land (as is the way with conquerors) and re-distribute it amongst a few knights, and most importantly (don't duck this one Tezza lad) how the slaughter of innocent people and the laying waste of parts of the country was justified*

*Remember - these were the people that actually lived and farmed here. - Sugarfoot Jack

Really Sugarfoot??

Pray enlighten us in what way the Anglo-Saxons were right to invade sovereign kingdoms with named and chosen successors, steal the land (as is the way with conquerors) and re-distribute it amongst a few to create the Heptarchy as they undeniably did, and most importantly (don't duck this one Sugarfoot lad) how the slaughter of innocent people and the laying waste of parts of the country was justified*

*Remember - these were the people that actually lived and farmed here.

Oh by the way Sugarfoot was Harold Godwinson any blood relation of Edward the Confessor? Duke William of Normandy was - one has a "RIGHT" to inherit, the other DOES NOT. Under what agreement was he the named Successor? But to get back to the point you raised -

Pray enlighten us in what way the Romans were right to invade sovereign kingdoms with named and chosen successors, steal the land (as is the way with conquerors) and re-distribute it amongst a few regional Governors and annex it all to Rome, and most importantly (don't duck this one Sugarfoot lad) how the slaughter of innocent people and the laying waste of parts of the country was justified*

*Remember - these were the people that actually lived and farmed here.

There you go Sugarfoot we are now back to about AD 43 - do you want me to go on???

Will Fly Thank goodness the PoW does even although strictly speaking he is not "allowed" to in public - stating something to a third party in private correspondence that is subsequently "leaked" is not airing or expressing your opinion to the world and its dog, different thing altogether.

Steve Shaw "Abiding by the law of the land and not trying to evade tax, as the royal estates endeavour to do"

I sincerely hope that you have proof to back up that outrageous accusation?? Remembering of course that Tax evasion is a crime and subjects the guilty party to fines or even imprisonment.

"tax evasion is the general term for efforts by individuals, firms, trusts and other entities to evade the payment of taxes by illegal means. Tax evasion usually entails taxpayers deliberately misrepresenting or concealing the true state of their affairs to the tax authorities to reduce their tax liability, and includes, in particular, dishonest tax reporting (such as underdeclaring income, profits or gains; or overstating deductions)."

The dealings of those who administer the three entities I mentioned must be the most closely audited enterprises I know off a fact that you appear to be blissfully unaware of.

Being the conscientious citizen that you are Steve no doubt you have reported your suspicions to the Tax Authorities and the Police (There is a reward you know for turning in Tax evaders - 10% of the sum owed), your accusation of course must have been accompanied by your irrefutable evidence. No of course you haven't because as with most of your comments to this thread you are talking from a degree of total ignorance that would amaze and astound any rational human being.

By the way Steve hows this for inefficiency when it comes to running and building a business (and tax evasion when it comes to it):

1990 - Income to the Exchequer from The Crown Estate £55million

2001 - Income to the Exchequer from the Crown Estate £148million

That despite the fact that the actually value of The Crown Estate went from £2.4billion in 1990 to £1.7billion in 1993 then recovered to the value of £4billion under these inefficient criminal bastards in 2001. The value of The Crown Estate by 2004 was £4.6billion and today it is worth something like just over £7 billion.

2011 - Income to the Exchequer from the Crown Estate £230.9million

Oh Steve and here is the real "kicker" for your argument - the vast bulk of The Crown Estate lies in URBAN property bought and sold in exactly the same way that anyone else buys any property. Crown Estate lands in Scotland were practically all bought, those that weren't came from reversion of Church Lands owned by the Episcopacy. Land bequeathed to the Church which reverted to the Crown so no robbery there either.

What British people were you claiming were robbed again??

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Will Fly
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 11:20 AM

Charles frequently airs his opinions publicly - and wrongly for someone in his constitutional position.

The content of his urgings to governmental departments have not been leaked - so we don't know what they are - but the fact that they cause annoyance and irritation to people in government is well documented. Again - unconstitutional. What will he do when he's king? Keep his mouth shut, I hope.

I repeat, as I've said before, that I'm not anti-monarchy, but the Prince can't have it both ways. He either accepts his constitutional position and desists from passing public opinions on all all and sundry, or he opts out of that position - in which case he's as free to speak as the next man.

To say, "Thank goodness" is not an argument, merely an opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 11:28 AM

"You may be right, but I'd hate to tell a casualty 2000 feet up Capel Curig that I was sending out a guitarist and a DJ to rescue him."

If I was a casualty I would be more concerned as to whether the pilot has been properly trained. I don't think his/her previous occupation would bother me.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 11:41 AM

I sincerely hope that you have proof to back up that outrageous accusation??

Why, do you suppose they'll be round in a minute to chop off my head?

And I sincerely hope that you have proof to back up that outrageous
suggestion that I give very little to charities or just put a few coppers in tins, or whatever it was you accused me of, just because you didn't agree about something totally unrelated. It's very hard to take you seriously after that.

The urban bits of the Crown Estate are soulless places. Southernhay in Exeter, for example. There's no soul because the people who work, live and shop there don't own any of it. The people who own it don't give a fig about anything other than making money out of it by virtue of the hard work of others. In the country, they would rather make money out of fools who pay a fortune to shoot at silly birds, instead of rolling up their sleeves and farming the land productively for the benefit of all of us. As for efficiency and those profits, I repeat: that dough is rightfully not theirs. They made it by exploiting what once belonged to all of us and which their ancestors took by force.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 11:53 AM

I stated above that I am not a Royalist.

Also, on another thread, I stated that reading these threads has in the past caused me to change my opinion from time to time.

Well, I may not be a Royalist but reading some of the shite above leads me nearer to defending the present system if its detractors have nothing to offer but envy and distorted figures.

I have a gong, been to four garden parties and escorted members of the Royal family around hospitals and still never called myself Royalist.

But you know what? Anybody reading some of the diatribe in this thread would be hanging the bunting out before they got half way through it. Some people seem to mistake feeling sorry for themselves (in the guise of sticking up for those they don't give a shit for) for egalitarianism.

Might take a leaf out of Bridge's book before he got old and confused, and become a one nation Tory.... Al least they have something to fight for, what with the Westlothian question etc. And one thing about agreeing with the Tories, you don't actually have to change your mind on anything, as they are the broad church Wilson used to claim Labour was.

Tally Ho!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 02:38 PM

What I fail to understand is why anyone who disagrees with us anti-royalists thinks that we are so because of envy. Now it seems that we also "feel sorry for ourselves." Not only that, because I'm an anti-royalist, I hate charities or something, at least according to Teribus. It's all rather amusing. I'm just waiting to be accused of having three heads. Or of possessing a very tiny penis. Who knows? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: meself
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 02:46 PM

I have a gong, but I've never called myself Chinese. (Is that helpful?)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 02:53 PM

just try and forget the accusations of envy or whatever else you tory guys. seriously-what is your problem with a fairer, more equal society where everyone is treated with an equal amount of respect, whatever their origin? why be so abusive to those you don't agree with? you do come across as mean-spirited and angry on here.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 04:06 PM

Excellent carriage procession on Tuesday, with all those hundreds of thousands of republicans lining The Mall!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 04:32 PM

A bit off the current tack here, but is the Queen's role as head of the church of England simply a meaningless title, or is she able to speak out about matters relating to the church.
For example, could she air her views on the latest clash between the government and church over the proposed legalisation of gay marriages?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 04:37 PM



Phil The Greek might have suspected you, out loud, of being slitty-eyed. This foreign chappie knows nothing of irony!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 04:38 PM

She wouldn't have a clue what it's all abite, Tunesmith.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 04:40 PM

I'll try that penultimate one again:

I have a gong, but I've never called myself Chinese. (Is that helpful?)

Phil The Greek might have suspected you, out loud, of being slitty-eyed. This foreign chappie knows nothing of irony!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 05:04 PM

"could she air her views on the latest clash between the government and church" As far as I understand it she is titular head. Wouldn't that mean in title only! She has in theory the power to appoint bishops etc but in practise it is all done "at the advice of the PM" - which in other words means it is the govt itself which has the ultimate say not the monarch. She wouldn't be able to comment on what you suggest anyway because it involves politics. Her role is to stay apolitical and not get involved! During the Coronation Oath she must also swear to protect the Presbyterian Church of Scotland. She is a member of the said church and is guaranteed a seat at the General Synod if she wishes it - but is not welcome to comment on internal affairs or actually take part in any debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 05:58 PM

"Not only that, because I'm an anti-royalist, I hate charities or something, at least according to Teribus" - Steve Shaw

Care to back that up with any quote from anything I have written that even remotely suggests that - or are you falling back on the old trick of putting words into my mouth then acting like the victim to take me to task for them??

Occasions where Charity has been raised by me:

1: "How much did you raise for Charity??"

2: "As far as Charity goes you give what you give - well done. The fact that you cannot put a figure to it indicates like most you just throw a few coins or possibly notes into collecting tins every now and then. Collectively the members of the Royal Family give their names, time and money to over 3,500 Charities."

Ah - and here was your response:

"Well there's a nice spot of prejudice for you. You haven't the faintest idea what I give or how I give it (though I will declare that I don't stuff money into rattled tins). You disagree with me so you automatically suppose that I don't give. Actually, giving to charity is hardly what this thread is supposed to be about. I'm not about to tell you or anyone else what I give, to who and how. I might well be an atheist but I'm very Jesus when it comes to this. And, as with the taxes the royals so valiantly pay, what they give to charities is only money that they have no moral right to."

Pssst Steve the bit there picked out in Italic bold is the point that you attempt to put words into my mouth and attribute to me a view I do not hold.

"What they give to charity IS ONLY MONEY they have no moral right to" - Really?? They give quite generously of their time as well and through their Patronage they have encouraged others to raise hundreds of millions of pounds to help those who need it.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 06:07 PM

"Her role is to stay apolitical and not get involved!"

Not many watched the TV programs it seems. Or read any history. Or understand the religious and corporate structure that she presides over. She does get involved "politically" when she meets heads of state and other royalty. Maybe her influence in these venues comes from the fact that she commands HUGE and VAST resources?

I'm just sayin. I am no expert. Just a thought or two to ponder. Fill yer boots. Piss and moan and decry her station as a silver spoon if you will. Just think about one thing... she could have you beheaded if you didn't pet her Corgis.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 07:32 PM

OK, Teribus. Kindly apprise us all of why you raised charity in the first place. You've gone on and on about it. Now tell us why my being an anti-royalist triggered in your brain a question about my charitable giving. Why, there's material for a whole psychiatric conference there!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 12 - 07:39 PM

And they give generously of their time whenever they are not hunting/shooting/fishing/holidaying on exclusive tropical islands or on massive luxury yachts/getting killed on Parisian jollies/going to the races/playing polo/riding in the dressage/calling off engagements due to colds in the head. Well, apart from that lot, they have plenty of time left over, so they might as well give it. God, some people are so easily taken in!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 12:25 AM

Why was Charity raised?? I believe that was because some "Muppet" came out with the line that "they" did nothing - The "Muppet" was wrong of course they do a great deal to help the less fortunate not only in their own country but around the world in general.

"And they give generously of their time whenever they are not hunting/shooting/fishing/holidaying on exclusive tropical islands or on massive luxury yachts/getting killed on Parisian jollies/going to the races/playing polo/riding in the dressage/calling off engagements due to colds in the head."

Pure "socialist" envy there Stevie boy?? Or would you decry and deny anybody you disaprove of their hobbies and interests. Care to give us a breakdown of the year and time spent in those pursuits?? Because in addition to all of the above they carry out over 4,000 "official" functions every year works out at over 10 a day Stevie. Particularly liked this one:

"calling off engagements due to colds in the head."

Ah so they are not allowed to be ill eh? You ever pulled a "sickie" Steve?? Or are you too "noble" to do that? Oh I forgot you won't be able to answer that because one half of you doesn't know what the other half is doing.

I think Don T was right, talking to you is like talking to a brick - Only I think he got the last word there wrong - like most of your information on the Royal Family - wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 04:24 AM

"Oh by the way Sugarfoot was Harold Godwinson any blood relation of Edward the Confessor? Duke William of Normandy was - one has a "RIGHT" to inherit, the other DOES NOT. Under what agreement was he the named Successor?"

Saxon kings weren't chosen by succession. Claimants to the throne presented their case to the Witan and this group decided who was king. Once king, that was that.

Harold (who had been shipwrecked in Normandy and had save his own arse as well as family members held by the Normans), was brother to Edward the Confessor's wife, and Edward named Harold as his successor on his deathbed. Harold had been confirmed and crowned by the Archbishop of Canterbury before the invasion.

So the 'right' to inherit was Harold's, not William's, who based his claim on an oath that was a) made under duress or b) never existed in the first place. Either way it's irrelevant, the king had been rightfully chosen and appointed according to English Law.

I note you did duck my question about the Harrying of the North and slaughter of it's inhabitants. Assuming you are defending The Bastard, do you defend his actions too?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 06:34 AM

""If I was a casualty I would be more concerned as to whether the pilot has been properly trained. I don't think his/her previous occupation would bother me.""

Since only a very small proportion of pilots actually have the aptitude to fly military helicopters at all, let alone with the absolute pinpoint precision required for rescue work, I think it is safe to assume that William has been trained to the highest standard and is an exceptionally able pilot.

My comment above was made in answer to an anonymous Guest, who seems to be of the opinion that his musician son is of more value to the community than "a useless........". He didn't finish the sentence, but the false assumption is abundantly clear.

Does anybody with half a working brain cell really believe that the military hands over twenty million quids worth of high tech machinery, along with the lives of crew and rescued civilians to dimwits?

GET REA!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 06:54 AM

""In the country, they would rather make money out of fools who pay a fortune to shoot at silly birds, instead of rolling up their sleeves and farming the land productively for the benefit of all of us.""

Can't resist this piece of pure ignorance of land usage.

First, grouse moors are areas of land which don't support either arable or livestock farming. These are where the largest proportion of shooting occurs.

Second, when it comes to weekend shooting parties on farmland, the majority of participants are middle class stockbrokers and accountants, with a smattering of social climbing small businessmen.

Nothing wrong with that, but they hardly rate as either Royalty or aristocrats, and their shooting venues are in fact productively farmed throughout the year, though more for the benefit, as you might expect, of the owner than for "all of us".

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 07:00 AM

""She does get involved "politically" when she meets heads of state and other royalty.""

You are misunderstanding the remit Gnu.

When she makes these foreign connections, she is representing the UK as a whole, and she is the only apolitical representative head of state.

What she cannot and does not do, is to represent any political party within the UK. She is above and outside of internal politics, so never represents government or opposition or their interests.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 07:09 AM

Just to dispel one more widely disseminated ant-monarchy myth,

Elizabeth is a very well educated, well travelled and knowledgeable woman, and I'd bet money on her in any kind of general knowledge contest, especially if all she had to oppose were those on this thread who think themselves smarter than her.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 07:45 AM

Don(Wyziwyg)T, I bet she'd be dead rubbish on answering any questions relating to modern pop music!
Inspite of having to endure hours of it last week!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 08:07 AM

So, Teribus (ignoring your insulting language for a minute!), you still haven't told us why my charitable giving, of which you haven't the remotest inkling (and never will have), is of even the remotest interest in this thread. It's reminiscent of the kind of aimless lashing-out that militant Christians come out with when confronted by the sheer logic of atheism. I suppose that hurling abuse is a substitute for shuffling uncomfortably from one buttock to the other...a sort of displacement activity...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 11:17 AM

So Steve you do not deny that you tried to put words into my mouth and attribute to me views that were not my own.

As to whether you give to charity or not matters not one jot and am not in the least bit interested I asked a question and got my answer, the point I was trying to make was that rather than do "nothing" the Royal Family works rather hard, charity and patronage of charities being undertaken in addition to their extremely hectic and busy round of "official" state functions.

Oh Sugarfoot was that the shipwreck were Duke William saved Harold's arse and in recognition of that fact Harold promised to renounce any claim he had on the throne when Edward the Confessor died. Edward the Confessor's preferred choice of successor was Duke William.

As to the rest?? What's done is done and what's won is won - Damn all I can do about it now. As a Serf you would have no better off, as I said before you either lived under a Saxon Lord whose forefathers had plundered and invaded, or you lived under a Norman Lord who had plundered and invaded. The modern day Royal Family bought and paid for what they actually own just the same as anybody else. They robbed no one. All else is owned by "The State" and it is quite right that "The State" should be lumbered with the running costs and maintenance of their property (It was the Queen, however, who paid for the restoration of Windsor Castle after the fire - she didn't have to).

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 02:39 PM

If my house catches fire I pay to get it rebuilt. Given providence, I would be insured, which I also pay for. This business about the royals, among the richest people in the world, paying out for stuff "they don't have to," unlike the rest of us who pay out for everything, is a laugh a minute, frankly. It puzzles me that anyone would wish to compliment them for doing voluntarily what everybody else does compulsorily.

You asked me about my charitable giving and I told you, politely, to mind your business. Be assured that that was not an answer outlining whatever charitable giving I happen to indulge in. Now I've pointed out that the royal family spend vast amounts of their time hidden from view, shooting, hunting, fishing, riding, holidaying and getting killed on French jollies with playboys while nanny looks after the kids. "Working hard" for them entails having an army of servants preparing them in every conceivable detail for all their engagements, taking them there and bringing them home, often in Bentleys (which we gave them), private jets, royal trains or massive yachts. "Working hard" entails turning up, waving and going home again. The only hard work is done by that aforementioned army of servants.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Ian Mather sans cookie
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 03:53 PM

Yeah but to be frank, I'd rather give it to them rather than you mate. They behave rather less vulgar and are more deserving of respect.

If part of your family were involved in an acrimonious divorce then a horrific car accident followed by disgusting conspiracy theories, you might be somewhat disappointed to read some ignorant tosser using it as an example of why to hate them.

Equality is a word used on this thread without the benefit of exhibiting it.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 03:54 PM

""Don(Wyziwyg)T, I bet she'd be dead rubbish on answering any questions relating to modern pop music!
Inspite of having to endure hours of it last week!""

LMAO!   You're probably right Tunesmith, but most of us ancient folkies would be even worse.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 05:57 PM

"She does get involved "politically" when she meets heads of state and other royalty." No she doesn't. She acts as an ambassador for UK plc. She is not involved in any discussions over issues as such. The elected govt does that. She has residual political powers in the UK which are basically to make sure a govt is in place. After an election if there is a hung parliament the leader of the largest party would initially try to form a govt. If they are unable to form a majority and perhaps don't want to run a minority govt - then the monarch will approach someone else and ask them to try and form a govt. That is her residual role. The leading UK politicians collectively acknowledge that their responsibility is to try to ensure that she is never put in that position. It is an archaic system but kind of works despite that. The other supposed royal powers (for eg declaring war etc) are actually wielded by the PM of the day. She is more a symbolic Head of State than an actual political Head of State such as the US has.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 07:14 PM

Yeah but to be frank, I'd rather give it to them rather than you mate. They behave rather less vulgar and are more deserving of respect.

Well, I didn't ask for it, Ian. Is this another of those "all anti-royalists must be dead jealous" posts? As for less vulgar, well here's a small selection of the oh-so-erudite Duke of Edinburgh's more choice offerings:

To female sea cadet: "Do you work in a strip club?"

To a tourist in Budapest in 1993: "You can't have been here long, you haven't got a pot belly."

To a British trekker in Papua New Guinea, 1998: "You managed not to get eaten then?"

Peering at a fuse box in a Scottish factory, he said: "It looks as though it was put in by an Indian." He later backtracked: "I meant to say cowboys."

To a woman solicitor: "I thought it was against the law for a woman to solicit."

To the Aircraft Research Association in 2002: "If you travel as much as we do, you appreciate the improvements in aircraft design of less noise and more comfort – provided you don't travel in something called economy class, which sounds ghastly."

To then Paraguay dictator General Stroessner: "It's a pleasure to be in a country that isn't ruled by its people."

To Scottish driving instructor, 1995: "How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough to pass the test?"

To a fashion writer in 1993: "You're not wearing mink knickers,are you?"

To Susan Edwards and her guide dog in 2002: "They have eating dogs for the anorexic now."

To Aboriginal leader William Brin, Queensland, 2002: "Do you still throw spears at each other?"

To black politician Lord Taylor of Warwick, 1999: "And what exotic part of the world do you come from?"

To wheelchair-bound nursing-home resident, 2002: "Do people trip over you?"

"I don't think a prostitute is more moral than a wife, but they are doing the same thing."

To female Labour MPs in 2000: "So this is feminist corner then."

To newsreader Michael Buerk, when told he knew about the Duke of Edinburgh's Gold Awards, 2004: "That's more than you know about anything else then."

To a British student in China, 1986: "If you stay here much longer, you'll go home with slitty eyes."

To journalist Caroline Wyatt, who asked if the Queen was enjoying a Paris trip, 2006: "Damn fool question!"

On smoke alarms to a woman who lost two sons in a fire, 1998: "They're a damn nuisance - I've got one in my bathroom and every time I run my bath the steam sets it off."

Ah yes, such a sensitive, witty and un-vulgar fellow!

If part of your family were involved in an acrimonious divorce then a horrific car accident followed by disgusting conspiracy theories, you might be somewhat disappointed to read some ignorant tosser using it as an example of why to hate them.

"Ignorant tosser?" Are you a member of the Teribus/Old Don/MtheGM school of debate, then? For "ignorant tosser," read "a chap who dares to disagree with me!" As for the acrimonious divorce, et al., Diana was a gullible, though not exactly innocent, victim of one of the most cynical, ruthless and manipulative families on the planet by a country mile. Begod, our future king was shagging his mistress just a few days before he married Diana! And I mean gullible. Starstruck would be a better word for it.



Not a word used in this thread by me, thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 07:18 PM

The last bit of my post should have read as follows:


Equality is a word used on this thread without the benefit of exhibiting it.

Not a word used in this thread by me, thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 08:09 PM

Brokering deals on the world stage is not politics? I am remiss.

The Duke? Why are you drifting?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jun 12 - 08:28 PM

I'm not drifting. I responded to Ian, who typed" Yeah but to be frank, I'd rather give it to them rather than you mate. They behave rather less vulgar...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 03:50 AM

"If my house catches fire I pay to get it rebuilt. Given providence, I would be insured, which I also pay for." - SS

And if it is NOT your house??

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 05:31 AM

Are you trying to tell us that Windsor Castle is not, de facto, in every possible practical sense, the Queen's? Oh yes, I forgot: it belongs to "the nation!" Then pray tell me exactly who is allowed to go in there, rustle up some nosh and go for a dump in the lavvy just before getting their head down for a kip. Why, I think I'll invent a quango, sign over the ownership of my house to it and make it responsible for decorating it, maintaining the fabric, doing the garden, restoring the run-down bits, rebuilding it in the event of fire (because I won't be insuring it, of course) and, not least, looking after my artwork (a twenty-quid bust of Beethoven in my case). The setup that looks after the palaces gets a cool fifteen million a year from the taxpayer, even though the badly-run palaces manage to make millions more by opening up occasionally to let us in, at great cost, to see our property. Ah, the advantages of "holding the palaces in trust for the nation!" All of the benefits and none of the responsibility! D'you think my new quango will be awarded a couple of grand for fixing my roof? Why should I pay?

And, in case anyone has been deceived into thinking otherwise, the Queen did not pay for repairs to fire-damaged Windsor Castle out of her own pocket.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 06:43 AM

"Edward the Confessor's preferred choice of successor was Duke William."

Only according to The Bastard himself, and the Witan didn't agree, and as they were the rightful law in the country at the time. Being such a stickler for the establishment I'm surprised you view the act of invasion, laying waste of the land and subsequent theft and dividing up of land to his cronies as being so worthy of defence. But then that would require a curious, questioning personality and perhaps you are not made that way (in the same way I simply don't believe everything I'm told and question the truth).

William himself seemed to recognise his own failings, as his deathbed confession suggests:

I tremble my friends/ when I reflect on the grievous sins which burden my conscience, and now, about to be summoned before the awful tribunal of God, I know not what I ought to do. I was bred to arms from my childhood, and am stained from the rivers of blood I have shed... It is out of my power to count all the injuries which I have caused during the sixty-four years of my troubled life. Source

So perhaps his appalling, murderous treatment of the English was niggling his conscience. Let's hope so.

Gnu: "The Duke? Why are you drifting?"

If you need to ask that question, you're not understanding what we're discussing.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 06:56 AM

1: "Are you trying to tell us that Windsor Castle is not, de facto, in every possible practical sense, the Queen's?"

Yep - Windsor Castle is owned by the The Crown Estate and is an "Official" Residence - it is not the Queen's. The private residences of the Queen are Sandringham and Balmoral both bought not stolen.

2: "I think I'll invent a quango, sign over the ownership of my house to it and make it responsible for decorating it, maintaining the fabric, doing the garden, restoring the run-down bits, rebuilding it in the event of fire (because I won't be insuring it, of course) and, not least, looking after my artwork (a twenty-quid bust of Beethoven in my case)."

Please do, won't do you any good of course as no-one would put any money into it, so you would end up bearing all the costs yourself and on your death, because you have signed it away, the property would revert to???? The Crown Estate.

3: Finally semi-right about something - the Queen did not pay for the repairs and restoration of Windsor Castle after the fire she merely chipped in £2million towards the costs. Opening up Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle to the public and charging an entrance fee paid for the rest.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 10:01 AM

""Opening up Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle to the public and charging an entrance fee paid for the rest.""

So, not taxpayers but tourism which, according to ""Detractors 'r Us"" is a myth put about to hide the robbing of taxpayers.

Teribus, you are really making it very difficult for these guys....Do keep it up!

When they are reduced to relying on Philip's loose tongue, they are really getting desperate.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 10:40 AM

the busiest tourist attraction i ever went to was versailles palace- i queued for hours to get in. it was fascinating and beautiful (in an over the top way) and access all areas. the louvre was just too busy. i don't think post-revolutionary france has any problem with attracting tourists. were the many artworks acquired by the crown put on permanent display in -say, leeds, glasgow or giggleswick -then that would really be a great gift to the nation and a far better tourist attraction than entry to half a dozen functional rooms in buck house for a tenner or whatever.

hi don -it was me with the musical son. i don't mean to say that he is better than william or anyone -i'm sure i could have put that better. we are all worth plenty in different ways (i am better than no-one and no-one is better than me being the obvious cliche) in general terms i'm saying that music is of more value than monarchy or military. i have actually needed rescuing (from a flood) and since have always given money to cockermouth mountain rescue. while you wouldn't want a bunch of musos turning up in a disaster zone - nor would you want to see a load of squaddies (or royals) at a music festival - thankfully we are much more likely to need the music! and you don't get thousands of musicians turning up in other countries and causing widespread death and misery (in the name of the monarch or leader (of any country) of the day)

peace, love and peaceful revolution -pete

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 10:54 AM

And the "rightful law in the land" when the Saxons invaded was what?

The Witan:
The Witan was the term used to describe the council summoned by AngloSaxon kings. These meetings of aldermen, thanes and bishops discussed royal grants of land, church matters, charters, taxation, customary law, defence and foreign policy. The succession of a new king had to be approved by the Witan.

The composition of the Witan was not set and the size of the assembly depended on what was being discussed and where it was held. For example, meetings were larger during religious festivals and when the king was resident in one of his palaces.

Sounds a bit of a "stacked deck" to me, the constitution of this "rightful law of the land" can be composed to deliver whatever result is required - True??

Harold Godwinson from the same powerful Saxon aristocractic family that had fought and schemed against Edward throughout his reign. As representative and head of the most powerful family in the land it is little wonder that the Witan (which on this occasion consisted of 60) voiced their support for Harold, whose hands were not exactly clean eh Sugarfoot:

"In 1063, Harold led an English army into Wales - an area that had never been overly respectful of English power. Reports from the time indicate that his army killed every adult Welsh male they came across. His campaign of terror left parts of Wales depopulated."

Perhaps the "rightful law of the land" in Wales approved, or perhaps it didn't. I tend to think that "the rightful law of anywhere" in those days depended proportionally on how strong your sword arm was and how many followers rode at your back.

That being the reality of life in the 11th century and according to recorded history on the 15th October 1066 at Hastings, Duke "A promise is a promise" William of Normandy he and his Army proved themselves to be "the rightful law of the land".

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 10:59 AM

i'm sure the law of the land anywhere these days depends on how strong your military is ( or was) and how many followers you have - it was always thus. doesn't make it right or lawful - unless you want to accept some really dodgy political ideas.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 11:30 AM

"When they are reduced to relying on Philip's loose tongue, they are really getting desperate."

Fnarr fnarr.

Anyhow, the main problem with replacing the monarchy as head of state is who to replace them with. A fixed-term president is a good idea, but the old monarchists retort of "President Blair" is enough to make even the most ardent republican wince.

Anyhow, Kings, Queens, Presidents, Lord Protectors all come and go. It's the ordinary people that endure, carry the treasury of our cultures, who protect the land and it's heritage. Long after House Windsor is just another name on a royal genealogy, the people will be playing our music, singing our songs and remembering our common causes and coming to terms with our common failures.

William the Bastard tried to get rid of us, but here we still are. Except now we're more diverse and are a glorious collage of cultures, beliefs and languages, and we will prevail. We always have.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 11:37 AM

Tezza, I'm pretty sure you see my point. I'm not arguing whether Harold had cleaner hands than anyone else, just that William was a brutal thug who ignored whatever system was in place (which, like it or not was the English way of doing things), put christ knows how many to the sword, starved thousands more to death simply for not accepting occupation by a foreign invader. How many hundreds of years after the invasion was French the language of court?

Anyhow, methinks thou ist playing devil's advocate here. I don't believe anyone in the world is as unquestioning as your good self appears to be. Impossible. Not natural.

Off now to support Ireland in the footy. Fare thee well!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 11:57 AM

Yep - Windsor Castle is owned by the The Crown Estate

So, pray tell, why didn't the obscenely-wealthy Crown Estate stump up after the fire? actually, you need to check your facts here.

Frankly, using Windsor Castle as your private home in every possible sense, including housing 500 of your staff there, holding state banquets there, using it as her weekend retreat, frequently entertaining foreign big-knobs in it, allowing the state to pay for its upkeep, yet wringing your hands when it get damaged and letting other people pay for it, is a bit like keeping most of your fortune offshore. All of the benefit, none of the responsibility!


Opening up Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle to the public and charging an entrance fee paid for the rest.

Tight-fisted gits! Yet they won't open them all the year round, which would raise even more revenue. Odd that The White House manages to do it.


So, not taxpayers but tourism which, according to ""Detractors 'r Us"" is a myth put about to hide the robbing of taxpayers.

If that's supposed to mean me, I didn't say that tourism was a myth, simply that it has never been demonstrated that tourism is increased by the existence of the royals. Windsor Castle is the only royal connection in the top 20 tourist attractions, coming in at a miserable 17th place, and France, which has no monarchy, gets almost three times as many tourists as we do.

To quote www.republic.org.uk, which see, There is a great deal of confusion in the media, and in public perceptions, about what property belongs to the Queen and what belongs to the taxpayer. The royal rule of thumb is simple: it's theirs when they want to use it, it's ours when someone has to pay for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 11:59 AM

also going to watch the footy- c'mon the republic!!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 12:00 PM

I know about capital letters too.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 12:06 PM

me too, it's just a lazy affectation. or maybe i am subconsciously refusing to accept that one letter is better than another -they are all equal. or maybe it's because i'm an anti-capitalist

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jun 12 - 12:12 PM

Heheh!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 03:09 AM

president wouldn't have to be bliar or any other politician - we could have a comedian like the mayor in london - how about billy connolly jo brand, bill bailey -or even better -president keith richards

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 08:28 AM

We don't need an ironic comedian. They don't hold a candle to The Duke of Edinburgh...

We capitalists have to hold on to what we have you know! Gawd Bless her!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 08:56 AM

You capitalists haven't got anything. We taxpayers had to bloody bale you all out when you failed, remember?


"Capitalist: thief with short memory..."

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 09:39 AM

I'm looking forward to the Gloucestershire Festival of Polo tomorrow, it will give my new Raynox Telephoto Lens Converter a good test! Unfortunately Luke Tomlinson is not playing in the England team, his brother Mark is of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 09:47 AM

Those taxpayers were people who had paid their taxes to the Exchequer and believers in the capitalist system who knew damn well that everybody would lose everything if the banks had been allowed to fail.

Besides I do not believe that the money put in was a gift - Now tell who will get it back when it is repaid - individual taxpayers or the Exchequer.

We are right back at the beginning of your nonsense about the Royal Family costing the taxpayers of the UK millions they don't, just in the same way the taxpayers of the UK did not lend a brass razzou to the banks, the Government did after you had all paid your taxess to the Government - you have no say whatsoever in what they spend it on - they decide that for themselves. Possibly one day that will sink in.

Mind you had you been a believer in that "communist" lunacy we would have all gone bust, having endured a life of poverty, about twenty years ago. Ask the Chinese how "Capitalism" is working for them - the answer you will get back will be, "Very nicely thank you".

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: meself
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 11:01 AM

Well - that's the answer you'll get from those Chinese for whom Capitalism IS working very nicely ....

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 11:09 AM

Well, I don't know where you imagine governments get their money from if not from taxpayers. And, last time I checked, paying tax was not optional, whether you were a "believer" in capitalism or not. As for getting our money back, well we certainly won't be getting two billion of our money back, neither taxpayer nor exchequer, from the Northern Rock bailout, and that's just for starters.

I'm a fan of "bail" in this context, not "bale", despite my earlier post.

Ask the Chinese in a year's time how their capitalism is doing. They are already feeling the chill. By the way, don't forget to ask the ordinary Chinese in towns and villages.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 11:19 AM

"Those taxpayers were people who had paid their taxes to the Exchequer and believers in the capitalist system . . ."

Er, do you have a choice whether you pay your taxes (unless you're Vodaphone etc)?

So this statement is wrong; you don't have to be a taxpayer to be a believer in the current version of the capitalist system.


"Very nicely thank you".

Because our workers are not paid too much, have no rights, and very little control over their own lives. Paradise for the rich capitalist, hell for the worker.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 12:39 PM

Ah but Sugarfoot old son Chinese workers have never had any of those things, they grew up and still live in a Communist State that is making money through the adoption of capitalist principles. Slowly but slowly the lot of the average Chinese citizen is improving.

Feeling the chill eh Steve?? Chinese growth down to what just under 9% what are the growth rates predicted for the West and the rest of the developed world Steve? They are measured in points of a percent the best performer around 2.5% I'd take China's chill any day - If the UK report a growth rate of 9% it would hailed as a bonanza.

Yes Steve, Governments get their money from Taxpayers and once the Government have got their hands on it it no longer belongs to the Taxpayer, and the Taxpayer has got absolutely no bloody say regarding what the money is spent on.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 02:17 PM

Well, we do have elections I suppose.


China is on the road to boom and bust. Their overseas markets, which their boom crucially depends on, are in severe decline, and China is trying to build an economy that relies on them less. The "success" of China's economy, I hate to remind you, is predicated on the large, state-owned companies, but as times get hard this is going to be a millstone, as capitalism always intends it to be. The Chinese are slashing interest rates as demand falls. Where have you heard that before? As I say, ask the question again in a year's time. I'm hoping to be still here.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 06:25 PM

"Well, we do have elections I suppose."

You mean those things where the "dyed in the wool" Labour voter votes Labour and the "dyed in the wool" Tory voter votes Tory, etc. Where each Party promioses to buck up and not make the same fuck-ups they made last time, but really because they are all professional politicians none of them actually give a toss about what any member of the public thinks?

Tell me who has a vested interest in keeping people down-trodden and trapped on benefits?? The answer is the Labour party.

Look at their track record since they won the election in 1945 - anyone reviewing their performance who still votes for Labour has just got to be "Brain Dead".

We've no gold reserves - Brown sold them off to buy votes
Our pensions are stuffed - Because Brown raided them to buy votes

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 08:29 PM

Er, I think it was Maggie who shut down British industry in the 1980s and threw millions on to incapacity benefit in a cynical move to keep the unemployment figures looking acceptable. While she was at it, she wrecked hundreds of communities in working-class areas and threw working people, families, towns and villages on to the no-hope scrapheap. Just after that she deregulated the City and allowed the Big Bang (thousands of yuppies making overnight fortunes without having to do a scrap of work), which led to the Big Bust of the early 90s (exit from the ERM and hundreds of thousands of home owners, Maggie's flagship policy representatives, being pitched into the misery of negative equity).

You appear to be the archetypal right-wing revisionist. Well, it's nice to know the true colours of those you debate with. At least us lefties are proud of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jun 12 - 08:37 PM

The Prince of Wales has been awarded the highest rank in all three military services by the Queen.

Prince Charles becomes a Field Marshal, Admiral of the Fleet and Marshal of the Royal Air Force.

Well there you go. Anyone here like to tell us how he "earned" all this? Heheh!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 01:25 AM

British industry was dead long before Maggie Thatcher became Prime Minister, all she did was put it out of its misery (British steel and coal was ridiculously expensive - I think we were mining coal at £250 per ton when we could get it delivered from Australia for £8 per ton - The Coal Industry was costing £750million a day to subsidise it - that just could not go on - Scargill & Co thought that it could and should by right). What is not mentioned in your little left-wing rant is the foreign investment that she brought into the country.

The country she handed over at the end of her tenure was financially sound, other European countries followed her example, then in 1997 TB & Co came onto the scene - Now after 13 years of Labour Government how would you describe the state of the country. The totally incompetent performance of Blair and Brown has destroyed our country, the "Coalition Government" that has followed them is doing no better, but giving them their due taking over from Gordon of Cartoon they have been passed a poisoned chalice.

Every Labour Government that has been elected since the end of the second world war has diminished the country and left the country in a total mess, that the subsequent Tory Government has had to pull us out of.

As for the "Honourary" Ranks awarded to Prince Charles?? I think that might have something to do with the fact that they are required to be held so that Prince Charles can take on some of the Royal Duties that presently can only be carried out by the Queen herself (86) or by the Duke of Edinburgh (90).

Talking about "earning" things some instances for you to look into.

Harold Wilson - the man who would not let you buy your own home - came into office owning one home, left office owning five.

Neil Kinnock - the man the British would not trust with running the country - compare his "lifestyle change" between him joining Parliament and today (Where did he get his millions)

The Blairs - Both lawyers now multi-millionaires (How??)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 02:27 AM

Before advancement to high rank for ceremonial reasons, both Lt Philip Mountbatten's, and his son the Prince of Wales's naval careers followed a normal career path. His next son is a successful, and obviously militarily gifted, career officer whose promotions are in accordance with his service seniority. Likewise his son-in-law. His other son turned out to be unfitted for a military career, and was clearly advised of this by his superiors and persuaded to resign his commission ~ chucked out, in other words, with no concessions to his family relationships. His two grandsons have likewise advanced to their present ranks of Flight-Lieutenant and Captain by normal due process of promotion, and are normally employed in the duties concordant with their ranks and arms of the service with no concessions. All of these have initially completed the full appropriate training in the appropriate officer-cadet institution, Dartford or Sandhurst or Cranwell.

There has been none of the joining with the rank of Staff Colonel which could have happened in certain royalties at certain periods. Every commission, every promotion, has been worked for and earned; with the sole exception of the one who failed to keep up, and had to quit.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 02:29 AM

Dartford!!

Dartmouth, buggerit!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 03:06 AM

To get back to the subject, it was a wonderful Jubilee in spite of all the usual whinges posted here!!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 04:59 AM

Trooping The Colour today.
Reminds me of a previous one at height of Irish troubles.
Although a prime target for assassination, and close relatives having already been brutally murdered, no bullet proof limo.

Riding side saddle through the crowded streets, a shot was fired so close it spooked her horse.
Most of us would have dived for cover on the ground, or hunched down and spurred the horse to a gallop.

She just steadied her horse, and had it walk on.
Every nerve must have been anticipating the second shot and the bullet tearing through flesh.
But, no outward sign.
That was her duty.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 05:59 AM

Before advancement to high rank for ceremonial reasons, both Lt Philip Mountbatten's, and his son the Prince of Wales's naval careers followed a normal career path. His next son is a successful, and obviously militarily gifted, career officer whose promotions are in accordance with his service seniority. Likewise his son-in-law. His other son turned out to be unfitted for a military career, and was clearly advised of this by his superiors and persuaded to resign his commission ~ chucked out, in other words, with no concessions to his family relationships. His two grandsons have likewise advanced to their present ranks of Flight-Lieutenant and Captain by normal due process of promotion, and are normally employed in the duties concordant with their ranks and arms of the service with no concessions. All of these have initially completed the full appropriate training in the appropriate officer-cadet institution, Dartford or Sandhurst or Cranwell.

There has been none of the joining with the rank of Staff Colonel which could have happened in certain royalties at certain periods. Every commission, every promotion, has been worked for and earned; with the sole exception of the one who failed to keep up, and had to quit.

Yeah, yeah, we believe ya - thousands wouldn't... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 06:36 AM

Name just one thousand!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 06:41 AM

"Slowly but slowly the lot of the average Chinese citizen is improving."

Not really, but it will improve if they can get democracy established. Whatever it is, China is not a communist state; it's more a sort of Capitalist Oligarchy, where there is a rich political elite, creaming off the top of a rich capitalist elite, a tiny weeny urban middle class and a vast reserve of what is essentially captive labour. The perfect conditions for capitalism to thrive, as the workers must not be paid the value of what they produce with their time and labour.

It's a right old mess over there, and my brother, who visits several times a year and travels well off the beaten track tells of how the state is spending vast amounts on large housing schemes, factories and shopping malls with no-one to occupy them as the cost is way out of the reach of ordinary citizens. There are huge cities we've never heard of over there, and these are expanding at an incredible rate.

Of course like unregulated capitalist societies anywhere, the scum rises to the top (see Levenson Enquiry, bankers etc). China has a chance to avoid this and sweep the board clean if it can avoid too much Anglo-Saxon influence. I welcome this, as I truly believe the Chinese, if allowed freedom of expression and speech as well as the rights we all enjoy here could be the most wonderful nation. So much potential that hasn't been pissed away for a quick buck by the likes of those whom run our societies (see Levenson Enquiry, bankers etc).

Queenies official birthday today. They have official birthday because in ye olden days if a monarch was born in wintertime the weather would often be bad, spoiling the day for the poor dears apparently. Anyhow, it's cold and slashing down today so best of luck. At least she got to hand out some medals making people members of an empire that (thankfully) has ceased to exist.

The anachronisms continue to pile up!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 06:58 AM

(again) surely it is obvious that those born into the royal families around the world are no better or worse than anyone else -we all just make the best of what we are born with and what the world throws our way.
however, they do seem to have a very limited imagination when it comes to career choices -the guys play at soldiers when not visiting places, while the women like horses when not opening things. not saying it's bad -just a bit predictable. i'm grateful to mark steel for telling us that the queen mother was an expert on the trombone, but other than that - not much apparent creative talent.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 07:07 AM

When I was in Beijing in 1988, a year before the Tiananmen protests, there was probably not enough inequality - i.e., if a doctor, wanting me to help him emigrate, told me the truth about his earnings compared with others; now they seem to have the same revolting inequality as the West...careful what you wish for..?

And re "Trooping the Colour" - how would you like to be directed about by someone tugging on either side of your mouth?; my poem "Horses for Courses?" - http://walkaboutsverse.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/walkaboutsverse-146-of-230.html

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 10:52 AM

""Prince Charles becomes a Field Marshal, Admiral of the Fleet and Marshal of the Royal Air Force.

Well there you go. Anyone here like to tell us how he "earned" all this? Heheh!""

Those are purely honorary and ceremonial titles. He'd get short shrift if he tried to issue orders. Militarily he holds only such reserve rank as he may have earned in service.

The level of ignorance in some of these responses is abysmal.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 11:10 AM

i do try to ignore the more obvious eejits on here -yes i know i am turning green and overweight while sheltering under the bridge over the cocker- however.....terribus et al-what planet are you on? ever heard of the term 99%/1%?, ever considered the life of chinese factory slaves? or families down your street? no matter what political system the 1% of the chinese are claiming to use - or here or greece or anywhere- it is the same old story. a few rich and powerful white men are running the whole show for their own benefit, while screwing the rest of the world and its people, as they always have. it isn't hard to understand. trying to justify the excesses,cruelties and luxuries of these thieves (from the time of william the conq. for f***sake!!) to the global capitalists of today is ridiculous. our brave and cheated armed forces fight wars in the name of the queen to secure cheap oil for the americans - she too, is being used. oops - just thought -you are being ironic aren't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 11:25 AM

it's nothing to do with ignorance to not know this stuff-life is way, way too short. the titles that lot award themselves have nothing to do with my life. or yours. i imagine they have occasional evenings around the fire looking at the big book of fatuous ceremonial protocol (i'm reminded of gormenghast)
'mummy.....shouldn't i get a new badge...i think i may be overseer of the confederation of highland ironmongers'
'would you like a new badge, dear? '
'weeeellll...i would really...and maybe a sash, too?'
(telegraph rustles, duke mutters) 'bloody idiot boy....'

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 01:17 PM

It was a pretty good show, except for the concert by those puffed-up 'celebrities'. Not so wonderful. I turned off the TV and put on a good old lp of music from the 50s.
How tastes in music have deteriorated!

(Any way to eliminate the posts that have no bearing on the thread title?)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 02:21 PM

stick strictly to the point? why? you must be a riot down the pub-do you go out with an agenda and never deviate?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 02:42 PM

It gave me much pleasure to watch polo at the Beaufort Club which stands next to Highgrove - excellent lunch!!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 02:44 PM

I don't include discussion of the noises heard in the bushes and back seats of the cars parked around the watering hole (pub- what's that?).

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 02:58 PM

Bonzo, I haven't watched polo since I was in University. I wish it was more popular.

Polocrosse is the closest we get here in the foothlls of the Rockies.
http://polocrossecanada.com/about/members/millarville

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 03:02 PM

There is a Calgary Polo Club, in Okotoks (also Calgary area. Didn't mean to slight them.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 03:23 PM

if you like something-go for it, why just watch others do it? unless of course what you enjoy is watching sweaty, rich boys on confused horses!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Jun 12 - 04:08 PM

Those are purely honorary and ceremonial titles. He'd get short shrift if he tried to issue orders. Militarily he holds only such reserve rank as he may have earned in service.

The level of ignorance in some of these responses is abysmal.

Don T.

Well if they're purely honorary and ceremonial, Don, why haven't you or I got one! So next time they show up at the Cenotaph, laden with a coupla kilos of dodgy gongs on their chests, are you going to tell us again what brave and mighty warriors they all are?

Abysmal isn't a level. It's a big hole. Cue next insult from owld Don...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Jun 12 - 05:40 AM

""Well if they're purely honorary and ceremonial, Don, why haven't you or I got one!""

Because neither of us is heir to the throne, with the responsibility of carrying out hundreds of public engagements.

Given the job description I'd rather have my life than his, especially as he only has the life his duties allow.

He didn't choose the family he was born into, and since his birth he has been trained for a role not of his choice either.

If you didn't want to follow your parents into the family business, you didn't have to.

Not so with him. Constitutionally he cannot resign.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Jun 12 - 06:04 AM

he only has the life his duties allow.

Not so. He spends, like the rest of the royals, months in every year out of public view on vast estates, luxury yachts or private tropical islands, huntin', shootin', fishin' and shaggin'. He doesn't get there courtesy of Ryanair either. Blinkers off!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 17 Jun 12 - 02:40 PM

"shaggin'" ?

Does he take Viagra?
Haven't seen anything in the tabloids. Nor any papparazzi photos. If you have a story, let's see it.

What libelous nonsense !

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Jun 12 - 03:12 PM

Hellooo? Considering he once declared that he would rather like to be a tampon within the confines of his good wife's, er, fundamentosus frontalis, I hardly think we need consider that he spends his holidays in a state of celibacy. However, you're right. I have no evidence. Just a hunch. And it isn't a sin, you know.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 10 Jul 12 - 06:29 AM

The 'tampon' conversation was entirely private and was published as the result of an eavesdropper. Even to allude to it is ungentlemanly. Can't people's private lives remain so, without folk speculating about whether one is 'shagging' or with whom?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 10 Jul 12 - 01:30 PM

Haven't been on this thread for a while.

Steve Shaw answered one of my questions by differentiating between tax payers and capitalists.

I'm a capitalist. That means I can become a tax payer which allows me to help fund a social program. Or for that matter, I'm a socialist who realises you need capitalism in order to fund socialist style infrastructure in the first place. I used to call it Labour, but the world is a funny old place.

Even The USSR sold us Lada cars and Zenith cameras....

So there isn't much difference really, except perhaps the lack of a chip on my shoulder.

Ian

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jul 12 - 01:36 PM

Their problem is that once everything they claim about the cost/benefit downside of the monarchy has been proved to be absolute nonsense, they have no other choice than to fall back on eavesdropping, rumour and downright lies.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jul 12 - 06:40 PM

Come on now, Eliza. Celebs' private lives are open season. We make them as rich as Croesus and all they have to do in return is be bloody careful as to what they say in front of whom. I think it's quite healthy that we can find out what these paragons are really like (unless you want to think that all kings, queens, princes and princesses lead fairy storybook lives and you don't want the bubble pricked). And let me just ask you this. What is more ungentlemanly, his declaring that he wants to be a tampon in his wife's, er, wellyouknow, or me just mentioning the unsavoury fact, when it's has been in the public domain anyway for many a long year? Regard it not so much as ungentlemanly but more as a corrective to the outpouring of gushing sycophancy that infests this thread.

As for you, Don, you appear to think that the more you call people who disagree with you liars, the more it makes them liars. Poor chap. Turn the record over.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jul 12 - 06:42 PM

"it has" innit

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 11 Jul 12 - 05:35 AM

So, Steve, you believe that it's fine for private telephone conversations to be tapped and the contents published? I don't care if it's Jack the Ripper on his phone, he still has the right to privacy. And Charles (or any of the Royal Family) is not a 'celebrity', there is a difference. Sycophancy? That's your opinion, to which you also have every right. But as for me, I just subscribe to the traditions of a millennium, and happen to like the continuity they provide. I feel they add to the stability of the nation. That's my opinion, to which I too have a right.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 11 Jul 12 - 08:38 AM

"Well if they're purely honorary and ceremonial, Don, why haven't you or I got one!"

I thought Don was The Firth of Forth?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 11 Jul 12 - 11:51 AM

And every time Australia ask the people if they want to get rid, they reckon she is far better than someone who actually wants the job.

Many science fiction authors, Arthur C Clarke springs to mind as one, imagine a system where either you get to run the world for a time, in the same way as jury service, or in more sci fi fashion, peoples' brains are probed and the person who least wants to be King gets the crown, like it or lump it.

Funny thing democracy if you don't believe in it. Whilst ever the majority want the status quo, Steve's comments (and others, but Steve is posting most at present) are just an opinion, not a statement of what is "wrong." it can't be wrong whilst ever people wave their flags. Or at least, whilst at least 51% do...

Me? I'm a happy democrat. (Not a Liberal democrat, but a happy democrat. In some ways I would love to be a Liberal Democrat. After all, my back gives me gip and if I joined them, I wouldn't have a backbone to give me trouble in the first place.)

That close to satire.......

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jul 12 - 01:30 PM

I can't think of anything more undemocratic than an heriditary monarchy that represents the worst of privilege and costs the country a fortune. Just because people want it doesn't alter the fact that it is an intrinsically extremely undemocratic institution. Gladiators, bullfighting and public hangings have been just as popular in their time. And bingo.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 11 Jul 12 - 01:37 PM

I can't think of anything more hideous than an anti-monarchist.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jul 12 - 02:15 PM

You haven't seen me with no shirt on.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Jul 12 - 07:14 PM

""I can't think of anything more undemocratic than an heriditary monarchy that represents the worst of privilege and costs the country a fortune.""

How many times do you think you'll need to re-hash that proven lie, before it becomes truth?

And a constitutional monarch does give a democracy an internaional voice devoid of political bias. I'll take that any day, rather than President Blair.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jul 12 - 08:30 PM

No political bias? Ha! That's rich. The royals are not only solidly right-wing but they represent everything that is traditionally hard-right in British society: unelected, privilege-ridden in every sense of the word, inherited wealth, descent from vicious land-grabbers - you name it! Bet they don't vote Labour.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Jul 12 - 10:21 AM

""Bet they don't vote Labour.""

Now you are showing your ignorance.

The monarch doesn't vote. She is above and outside of the political process, and by long established tradition doesn't take sides.

Her thoughts are her own, however, if you feel competent as a mind reader.

But she never expresses an opinion.

I believe I am right in saying that those in line for the succession don't vote either.

So whoever they might favour in their thoughts, they have no influence on events, and get this straight in that ball of wool between your ears. They DO NOT cost the country a fortune, in fact the reverse.

The financial facts are a matter of public record, and indisputable.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 12 Jul 12 - 10:34 AM



A comment which betrays an unsurprising lack of wit and imagination.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 12 Jul 12 - 11:58 AM

I am going to a talk given by a Conservative MP this evening and I shall enjoy heckling any raving lefties who spout their usual rubbish!!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,SFJ
Date: 12 Jul 12 - 12:45 PM

Try having a pint and chat with them instead. No need to be nasty.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 12 Jul 12 - 03:25 PM

hello again, comrades -still we bicker, on round and round the usual circles and no progress. i am not going to a talk given by a conservative mp this evening, i am heading up the pub. i may -hopefully-exchange opinions with some folk i don't wholly agree with (though i can honestly say i have had less than a dozen conversations with people claiming to be conservatives (and this includes new labour types) since 1979-maybe i'm just lucky to have lived in the north and scotland in that time) i hope i can treat their opinions with respect and have a laugh while enjoying a few pints of jennings and playing scrabble. for those tories among you -boko?- can i ask again-assuming you aren't wealthy or royalty-why? didn't go to eton? not one of their 'set? the bullingdon boys do despise you, you know and will take away everything you rely on to keep our society decent if we let them.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Jul 12 - 05:32 PM

I rather imagine that if Prince Charles has any political preferences they'd be for the Greens rather than the Tories.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jul 12 - 05:57 PM

He gets a damn sight more from being an arch-capitalist arch-landlord than he does from his organic veggies, so I doubt it!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Jul 12 - 06:41 PM

Wouldn't "feudal" be a more accurate term for his role as arch-landlord, ratgher than "capitalist"?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Jul 12 - 03:13 AM

The first ever Labour PM and the King.
MacDonald wrote in his diary: "King most friendly and expressed thanks and confidence. I then reported situation and at end I told him that after tonight I might be of no further use, and should resign with the whole Cabinet.... He said that he believed I was the only person who could carry the country through."