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.

 

Queen Elizabeth will not attend today's New Year's Day service

page: 5
17
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 05:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Davg80
a reply to: testingtesting
but if you asked any Rangers fan if they want a queen, they would say GOD SAVE THE QUEEN.
You should get your facts right, if you believe that its just Scots that want rid of the Queen, then you are easily influenced by the mutter in the gutter.


I agree with the statement at the end but I was a Rangers fan and have never, ever been a Royalist. My Dad was in the Orange Lodge and he hates the monarchy too. My Brother-in-law is a die hard Rangers fan and a serving member of the Armed Forces and he doesn't like old queenie either (and we all voted for Scottish Independence). There are a lot of Rangers fans who aren't Royalists and who supported Scottish Independence. Though the staunchest Scottish advocates of Better Together were Rangers fans. You could spot them a mile off, they were the ones who would run away when you gave them facts they couldn't deny.

I took the liberty if highlighting advice you gave another member, you should heed it yourself...
edit on 2/1/17 by djz3ro because: Forgot something...

edit on 2/1/17 by djz3ro because: Doh!!!




posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 05:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
And the crown estate would continue to provide funds to the treasury even without a hereditary head of state so not really an argument for keeping the royals.


Agree, but keeping and supporting a President may not be cheaper - look to France and the US as examples.

On refurbishing Buckingham Palace. Well, the building is a national building, so needs to be maintained for the nation, whether it is a Royal building, or not.

Fact is the appetite for keeping a monarch is undiminished in the UK, and Scotland for that matter. For a republic to be attractive to me the republicans would have to come up with a model that works. Like it or lump it the existing Parliamentary system with an hereditary head of state works.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 05:57 AM
link   
It's strange, this thread was showing up in MyATS after I posted my first comment on the OP, which was that, although I am no fan if the monarchy bur I know what it's like to worry about an elderly relative who's ill and, for her family I wish her well. However, the whole Royal family can get in the bin as far as I'm concerned.

It was along those lines bur now my first post here shows up as a reply to someone later in the thread and my first post has vanished without a trace. I don't understand why this was showing up on MyATS at all. In this instance...



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:21 AM
link   
a reply to: djz3ro

Well mate you are in the minority even for the East of Scotland, over here in the West of Scotland i know for a fact that i am right, my whole family are in the orange lodge, my step dad is worthy master and a mason and my papa had an orange march at his funeral,
i had been going to Rangers games since i was 5, in buses from the west of Scotland, i went off the old firm thing when facebook came out and i seen how mental it is, people abusing each other because there two teams are divided by dominations of a religion. its absurd.
But i commend your dad for not conditioning you in that way, i will do my best to stop my son from picking a side thats for sure, even though im still a blue nose at heart.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:28 AM
link   
a reply to: djz3ro
but lets recap, i said ask any fan when i should have said the majority, my bad but i just shoot from the hip, i forget there are people on here monitoring your every letter.
but you say you voted for Scottish independence and you dont want a monarchy, yet you stick up for someone that says this
"Most of us are in the UK just whingy Scots and such don't.
75% of us still want the queen."

your just a barrel of contradictions mate..

edit on 2-1-2017 by Davg80 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-1-2017 by Davg80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 06:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: woogleuk

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: woogleuk
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Link to prove her home had a £369m facelift please? As far as I recall, it was Buckingham Palace that had work done on it, and even then that was funded by profits from the Crown Estate.


Buckingham Palace to get £369m refurbishment



Buckingham Palace is to undergo a 10-year refurbishment costing the taxpayer £369m, the Treasury has announced.


I think you misunderstand, I asked for a link to prove HER home had a £369m facelift. You provided a link that shows a piece of state/national property had some refurbishment done paid for by the crown estate. That is not her, or any of the royals home.

The Queen owns two homes, Sandringham House in Norfolk, and Balmoral Castle in Aberdeenshire.

OK, Got you now. Maybe we should be asking then, If Queenie is merely a tenant then surely she should be paying the bedroom tax on her rented property...How many rooms extra (100+?) at lets say £25 a room.. I mean all things being equal and in these times of austerity we all need to tighten our belts. We are all in this together or so we are told..


I could think of better things to spend £369 million on in this day and age. Funny we dont have enough to feed the poor or fund the NHS but we seem to be able to find plenty spare change when it comes to London.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

although i dont want them because i want equality, they are putting more in than they are taking out.

The Royal family generate close to £500 million every year for British tourism with The Tower of London, Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace the most popular Royal destinations. 7. In 2010, 29.627 million people visited Britain, spending an average of £563 per person and staying for seven days.20 Jun 2011
www.telegraph.co.uk...



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 07:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
I could think of better things to spend £369 million on in this day and age. Funny we dont have enough to feed the poor or fund the NHS but we seem to be able to find plenty spare change when it comes to London.


People argued the same thing when the tax-payer shelled out half a billion in building a lavish Scottish Parliament when it could have been done for far less. It is incidental that Buckingham Palace is in London. If the building is a public building then it must be maintained.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 07:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Davg80

How many of those tourists actually saw the Queen or a Royal though ?
I would suggest it is our history that draws tourists not the Monarchy themselves , without the sitting residents we could open up all of Buckingham Palace and its treasures to the public which would generate even more revenue , perhaps even pay for the needed renovations.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 07:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Davg80
a reply to: Soloprotocol

although i dont want them because i want equality, they are putting more in than they are taking out.

The Royal family generate close to £500 million every year for British tourism with The Tower of London, Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace the most popular Royal destinations. 7. In 2010, 29.627 million people visited Britain, spending an average of £563 per person and staying for seven days.20 Jun 2011
www.telegraph.co.uk...

And not one got to see a member of the royal family.

Scottish visitor numbers rise to 15 million




According to the figures, the majority of overseas visitors to Scotland came from Europe. However, the number of North American tourists rose by 28% to more than 500,000, with expenditure increasing by 48%. Edinburgh came second only to London in the number of visits and spending across UK destinations, while Glasgow also featured among the top tourist draws.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 07:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Davg80
a reply to: djz3ro
i went off the old firm thing when facebook came out and i seen how mental it is, people abusing each other because there two teams are divided by dominations of a religion. its absurd.
But i commend your dad for not conditioning you in that way, i will do my best to stop my son from picking a side thats for sure, even though im still a blue nose at heart.


It was the old firm that put me off football entirely. My Dad tried his best to get me.to join the lodge but I was never interested. My Grandad was quite high up.in the Masons too, i've considered it from time to time but more out of curiosity than any genuine desire. I am still a bluenose at heart too, I might hate football but I hate Celtic more, ha ha. (that shade of green is offensive to my eyes)

I know I'm in a minority though and I apologise if I came across a bit rude, it was actually someone offline that annoyed me and it came out in my reply to you. You are, of course, correct, I mean Rangers colours are Red, White and Blue for a reason, that's the same reason most fans fly the Union Flag, they come from a Protestant Unionist background.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 07:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Davg80
a reply to: djz3ro
you say you voted for Scottish independence and you dont want a monarchy, yet you stick up for someone that says this
"Most of us are in the UK just whingy Scots and such don't.
75% of us still want the queen."

your just a barrel of contradictions mate..


Not really, when that comment was made I said there are more anarchists in England than in Scotland, which is true, and anarchists are against the royals so I was just meaning that it's not just "whinging Scots" there are a helluva lot of people in England don't support them either. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Sherlock beats the Queen in festive TV ratings

What ye say...King Sherlock the 1st..?



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: djz3ro
im sorry also,
after that statement i think we may be more alike than i originally thought lol.
i jump in without thinking a lot of the time especially when someone has annoyed me,
but i also reflect and put my hand up when im wrong, sometimes i like being proved wrong
because i can correct myself, and im thankful for that, too many people are too set in
their ways and nothing can change that.

edit on 2-1-2017 by Davg80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:11 AM
link   
I'm not saying that I believe in this remote viewing, but since this is a recent thread - I thought I should add that I saw in another thread the Queen was mentioned in a video. This particular video:



The first guy in the video that does the remote viewing saw that possibly the Queen was wandering the halls of Buckingham Palace in a nightgown, and looking like she's lost(Alzheimer's, or something like it). It will be interesting to see the news over the next year, to see if any of these people's visions pan out!

Edit: It's towards the end of the first guy's remote viewing session. Start the video at 22:22 if you want to see just the part that was mentioned on the Queen. I'm not sure if the rest of the vision ties in with the end of the vision where the Queen is mentioned.
edit on 1/2/2017 by InFriNiTee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: InFriNiTee

What twaddle!



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Sky news are running a special right now, The Queen at 90.

Caught a bit of it and it made me think of this thread.
I do wonder if there's anything in it beyond filling space in the schedule.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Davg80

Cheers dude and I hope 2017 is a good one for you



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: djz3ro

all the best for 2017 to you buddy



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Yes but would they still want to come if there was no monarchy, would people still go to the nou camp if barca was no more, or the Vatican if there was no pope. I think the numbers would drop in all cases. Plus you would have to pay more to make all this accessible to Joe public thus increasing expenditure again.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join