It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Don't trust BBC,H.M. Elizabeth II is healthy. Charles is not Yet King or ruler of Episcopal Church

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   
The Peace of God to all that belong to the Light,
Dear Readers,

If you are Episcopalian, Anglican or fan of the British culture, and became in shock after to have read the BBC news report released in twitter of the death of the British Queen, you can breath again calmly, it was a just a false rumor, the Queen is actually healthy , no reasons to anticipate her death at least in the near future.

This although false was a report that spread since June 3th so quickly, after to being originated from a so incredible mistake committed by a Journalist, since it took hours to be fully dismissed around the world by the news agencies, and of course was enough to motivate a lot of speculations of the real health condition of the Monarch.


Hence Prince Charles is not Yet British King or General Governor of the Church of England, the Queen remains as principal of those two positions, she is in full control of her physical or mental abilities , her health is stable and pretty acceptable for her age, and no reason to think the contrary.

The rumor was certainly dismissed , but it was enough to make the people think seriously on what could be the real scenario and also how reliable is the BBC in to follow or cover an eventual real health Crisis of the Queen. The incident is still on investigation, since was originated by the official British news service, so it remains as one of the worst mistakes ever committed in the History of the BBC.

The rumors spread in twitter of the supposed death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II were originated in a statement saying that The Queen has died, from a journalist of BBC that was covering a routinely annual medical examination of the Monarch, that was the real reason for which she attended a Hospital.

A possible explanation that emerged hours after it started is that it was part of rehearsal for a possible future real situation, however, the British obsession for anticipation and preparation of a protocol for almost any possible important event may justify such a false alarm around the world?

www.nbcnews.com...

m.snopes.com...

www.newsmax.com...

A possible succession at this point on the Throne of England does not look as peaceful or stable as it has recently occurred in other European countries recently like Belgium or Spain, due to the scandals that surround the life of Prince Charles, who eventually can try to be King in such a case.

Of course there is a lot of skepticism on the future of the British constitutional Monarchy, one of the most stable of the world, and the Church of England for the so scandalous private life of the first in the line of the succession of the throne Prince Charles, who married in a civil union ten years ago the divorced lady Camilla Parker-Bowles, with whom he had a life long adulterous relationship, an attitude that defy the status quo of what supposedly must be the behavior of a future Principal of a National Church and Head of State.

The last British Monarch to have had an adulterous affair and then marry a divorced lady, the American socialite Wallis Simpson, was King Edward VIII, who abdicated in 1936 in the middle of a huge institutional crisis.

en.wikipedia.org...

Unfortunately this horrendous mistake by Ahmen Khawaja, a reporter working for the BBC's Urdu-language service, triggered an avalanche of replies that boosted a rumor that is absolutely false, no sense, since the life of the Queen has not been even in risk or in danger.

Here below more links that refer to how this rumor spread along the web with impressive pace before to be denied by the BBC headquarters in London, when thousands of members of the media around the world contacted them to confirm or dismiss the impression that the death of the Queen had occurred on June 3th of 2015.


wncn.com...

false rumor of Queen death spread from Twitter

www.latinpost.com...

BBC released promptly a preliminary apologize for the false alarm of their Journalist that has moved a huge reaction around the world in question of hours in which there was uncertainty of the reality. It seems, nevertheless, this was not a hoax, but an absurd mistake that is still under investigation.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

edit on 7/1/2015 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

Sounds good. I didn't care one way or the other, but hey you don't have to worry about me not panicing. I have MY towel.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Well thank god for that.

Granted, I had no idea Twitter was all abuzz about it, and hadn't even heard anything about it. But if I had, I definitely would've "hmph'd" before I went on with my day.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

I wouldn't really be affected anymore than when I hear about the death of anyone.
She is not someone I know personally, and I am not a supporter of the constitutional monarchy system where nobody outside of that particular family can aspire to be head of state.

The only reason I dread the death of the queen is the looks of disdain I will certainly get when many people immerse themselves in a collective grief which I will not share.
I experienced it when Princess Diana died, it will be worse when the Queen eventually goes.

...no hard feelings towards the woman though, she has served the country, both as a volunteer during WWII, and as monarch, decent wage as well, but I don't know her so her death will be no more emotionally important to me than any death I read in the local paper.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   
When they said old queen.

I thought Elton John passed away.

I'm glad to hear they are both ok.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light This twitter mistweet happened on june 3rd. It was fixed within about 2 hours.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand
I don't think much of England would be as emotional as they were over Diana's death. Though there will be no shortage of pretenders. We do seem to enjoy an excuse to come over all dramatic. I, for one, wouldn't be upset if their whole wretched bloodline vanished tomorrow.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Lol, I noticed that as well, hence my 'general' reply regarding not caring any more or less when the Queen dies compared to the death of any human being who I do not personally know.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: SlowNail

Oh, I wouldn't be so sure, once it is 24/7 on the news, with images of weeping citizens etc, it is going to be a nightmare as far as I see it.
I actually dread the day for that reason.
I can imagine it now:

Random person: "Isn't it terrible, ohmygosh I'm so sad"
Me: "I didn't know her, she was old anyway and had a decent life so I don't share your grief"
Random person: "You uncaring prick"

...I may even change from my honest position as when Diana died, it goes against the grain but I might just lie and make out I give a #.
I dread the day



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand
Oh, no doubt, media will be all over it like fat on chips. Still not representative of England though. There will be those who want to 'join in', but I suspect most won't give a monkeys. Kind of like the Royal baby thing. No-one I knew cared. In fact, everyone was sick of hearing it. Media went on forever and all I saw for 2 weeks were the same 2 daft bints screaming and waffling.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: SlowNail

True, I only know a few old people who actually give a # about the 'royal' family, but I know loads who get themselves caught up in 'national communal mourning' based on whatever the media spoon feeds them.
Remember the bank holiday for the Queens jubilee, I partied at the local pub, with roads closed for the piss up which spilled over into the street. I didn't speak to anyone who actually cared she had been queen for 60 years just folk like myself enjoying a community party.

When Diana died though I was walking past the local 'shrine' of flowers at the town hall and stupidly said (too loud) to my mate how ridiculous I thought it was as nobody who laid the flowers knew her any more than whatever was portrayed in the media.
Two psycho women went mad, calling me all sorts, I backed away and they chased me swearing and threatening to # me up.
I'd never seen anything like it, and I ran, just because it was the best option dealing with psycho women who I couldn't really defend against physically for fear of the police reaction.

I genuinely dread when the Queen pops off, there will be similar psycho royalists I'm sure, and I'll probably pretend to give a toss just to avoid trouble.
Shameful though, it goes against the grain for me, but I can't be arsed with the bull#, I've learned my lesson lol.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Well Dear reldra, you are quite right, However, two hours to correct such a grave news coming from the official news agency of Great Britain about the death of the head of State is certainly a lot of time, it is almost an unbelievable scenario.

Just to understand the point suppose that it takes two hours to CNN, ABC, CBS or NBC to correct a false alarm released by any of their reports that President Barack Obama has died, it would easily affect so much the stock, commodity and Forex markets before the denial arrive.

It is enough to check how professionally was given the confirmation of the death of President Kennedy 52 years ago in the news, the death was never anticipated even after the shot occurred in Dallas, or what was the way the agencies handle the attempt of Assassination of President Reagan in March of 1981 to see the difference.

Here is how CBS and NBC covered President Kennedy on November 22nd 1963, before the death was confirmed:

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 7/1/2015 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

The Queen does not have executive powers like the US president.
Her death makes no difference to anyones lives outside the family concerned. Why put her on a pedestal?
Please explain how anyone else's life is affected by the death of the Queen?
Won't make a scrap of difference to my life, or the FTSE stock exchange.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

She is not head of Government, but she is the head of State, so she is really the most stable political figure of her Country,as well as other countries on the British Common Wealth, like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, a lot of British Caribbean islands and in other points overseas. She is also Principal of the Church of England, and by extension of the Episcopal or Anglican faith along the world.

Now being the Sterling pound one of the most stable currencies of the world of course her death, with an eventual institutional crisis in risk to occur in Britain, may affect all the investments around the world in that value.

The huge devaluation of Dollar impacted by the astronomical giant external public debt of the United States right now has moved many investors to other currencies and the British one remains in the preference of the people, because also Euro is also clearly menaced by the public finance crisis that is occurring in Greece, and may explode in a possible domino effect to other European economies, especially of the creditors of the Greek finances and this in spite of the possibility that this anticipate more Mediterranean countries similar crisis in countries like Italy, Spain or Portugal.


Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 7/1/2015 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Great, I don't know, whatever. I'm not a fan of the British Aristocracy, they have an undue influence on the U.S. government. The U.S. is their child and they are our "parents".



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand
If she dies it will help stimulate the economy further in the short term. A such as I hate to admit it, her existence is vital for the tourist industry in London, far more than I initially thought.

But I agree, I couldn't care less. She's German ruling Britain. I thought this was one of the main reasons for WW2, to stop this from happening.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: The angel of light
Now being the Sterling pound the most stable currency of the world of course her death, with an eventual institutional crisis in risk to occur in Britain, may affect all the investments around the world in that value.

Nope that is ridiculous and your invention alone. When the Queen dies, Charles will become King, and he will have as little power over anything as his mother has now.
The international economic markets won't give a toss, it affects nothing whoever is the head of state of the UK or commonwealth countries.

You are being a drama queen in my opinion.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

I'd say that anyone relying on Twitter for OFFICIAL government reports is doing it wrong.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: rossacus

The whole constitutional monarchy thing may well be an earner for the country with tourists, I don't know, you can read conflicting stat's either way.
I do know 'constitutionally' that there is no justification for a single family to produce heads of state for many countries aside from the claims of 'tourist money' which I personally doubt.

I live in a place which is absolutely dependent on foreign tourists, and there is no royal link here.
...but I can see the responses now, "They chose to come to the UK because of the royal family!"
I say bull#.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Really?

Have you checked the motion of the Sterling pound in the Forex market recently?

In April , when there was the 89th birthday of the Queen, and rumors came again of a possible abdication in favor of her son Prince Charles, the British currency fell dramatically, and well another interesting fall occurred precisely in June 3th when this false rumor of her death came over.

So excuse me, but the Charts don't lie, so if you want to call names to others I think you need to monitor these indicators before.

www.marketwatch.com...

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 7/1/2015 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join