Entire Queen's household is called to 'highly unusual' emergency meeting at Buckingham Palace tod

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

It never ceases to amaze me that anyone can support a head of state being decided by accident of birth alone.

a reply to: ofnoaccount

hahaha yeh right accept for the part they believe they are spiritually and morally above everyone else in the world because of their bloodline and divine rights !

royalty are scum , every last one of them

a reply to: grainofsand

It is the way of The Lord

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: ofnoaccount

royalty are scum , every last one of them

Oh QQ
What makes you so superior that you can judge "every last one of them"?

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

It never ceases to amaze me that anyone can support a head of state being decided by accident of birth alone.

Subservient people over here fawn over the descendants of Warmongers, they don't like admitting how they got in to the position they got too, it isn't a pretty story at all.
I'm English before anyone starts and I'm allowed my opinion, the lineage and story makes the Game of thrones blush.

I won't celebrate anyones death, but I also don't go wild everytime a 2 yr old descendant is photographed and put on every headline purely out of nepotism.

originally posted by: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

originally posted by: kamatty
Prince Philip is retiring from official dutys at the end of the year.

So dunce much?

It is still pretty weird to rouse everyone in the middle of the night from all over and tell them to get down to London ASAP. That's an announcement that could have waited.

Someone going funnier than usual in their old age?

Maybe Prince Philip did something strange last night and the meeting was to inform everyone he is acting strange and to seek verification before doing anything major. The fact that they announced he would be stepping down this fall last night may be a clue that he is having some problems with decisions. He is ninety five after all, maybe his last function didn't go as well as anticipated.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

It never ceases to amaze me that anyone can support a head of state being decided by accident of birth alone.

I agree with you in principle, however, in the case of Queen Elizabeth, the Brits got lucky.

She will go down as one of the most noteworthy world figures spanning the last 2 centuries.

royalty are scum

That is offensive against the dignity of the reigning sovereigns and their divinely sanctioned authority by the cultivation of the gods...

a reply to: stolencar18

their actions speak for themselves
and I can judge them on their actions as can anyone else

no one said I was superior , it's the royals who claim dominion and superiority over everyone else.
It's just you who thinks i'm claiming superiority because im judging them for being royalty, but tell me when its wrong to judge other humans for being inhumane and also exercising superiority over others, I judge them for their actions.

They effectively live in luxury when the nation they rule rots beneath them
so I can judge them any way I see fit I am only human after all and we all like to pass judgement on others , they are not fit to rule anyone.

You dont have to like it that in my opinion I think they are scum , no one is above anyone else , the bodies we are born into do not grant us divine rights over anyone else , we are all made from he same biological materials and are all equal.

a reply to: ShadowChatter

hahahahahah , I know right

I couldnt care if they are offended , like they care for any of their subjects

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: stolencar18

their actions speak for themselves
and I can judge them on their actions as can anyone else

no one said I was superior , it's the royals who claim dominion and superiority over everyone else.
It's just you who thinks i'm claiming superiority because im judging them for being royalty, but tell me when its wrong to judge other humans for being inhumane and also exercising superiority over others, I judge them for their actions.

They effectively live in luxury when the nation they rule rots beneath them
so I can judge them any way I see fit I am only human after all and we all like to pass judgement on others , they are not fit to rule anyone.

You dont have to like it that in my opinion I think they are scum , no one is above anyone else , the bodies we are born into do not grant us divine rights over anyone else , we are all made from he same biological materials and are all equal.

Wow, don't some other people run the country, like for longer than you been around?

Who do they rule over?

WTF dude? Just be glad you weren't born into the untouchable caste in india.

Here is a comment I posted to the Daily Mail re. this "hysteria:"

With all due respect to HM the Queen, I believe both the Palace and DM shoulder the blame for last night's hysteria. When an "emergency" meeting is called, with Royal employees summoned to Buckingham Palace no less, what were people supposed to think?

The way this was announced it was natural for most everyone to believe that a Royal death had occurred. Which did not, thank God.

Here is how I would have written the headline: "Buckingham Palace calls ROUTINE meeting for Royal staff." The report could have been short and to the point: "Buckingham Palace has confirmed that a staff meeting will be held today. News about what will be discussed to be announced shortly." Or, there could have been no announcement of this meeting at all.

That the Duke of Edinburgh will retire from Royal service did not, imho, constitute an "emergency." Usually, the word "emergency" means just that.

Source

I honestly believed that something happened to the Queen - otherwise I wouldn't even have started the thread.

a reply to: grainofsand

We Australians are asleep - We still have a Governor General (answers to the Queen) who can sack our elected Political Party

a reply to: ShadowChatter

divinely sanctioned authority by the cultivation of the gods

Just a mans interpretation of some scriptures to ensure his family stays in power.....

en.wikipedia.org...

Scots texts of James VI of Scotland[edit] The Scots textbooks of the divine right of kings were written in 1597–98 by James VI of Scotland before his accession to the English throne. His Basilikon Doron, a manual on the powers of a king, was written to edify his four-year-old son Henry Frederick that a king "acknowledgeth himself ordained for his people, having received from the God a burden of government, whereof he must be countable." James I based his theories in part on his understanding of the Bible. The state of monarchy is the supremest thing upon earth, for kings are not only God's lieutenants upon earth and sit upon God's throne, but even by God himself they are called gods. There be three principal [comparisons] that illustrate the state of monarchy: one taken out of the word of God, and the two other out of the grounds of policy and philosophy. In the Scriptures kings are called gods, and so their power after a certain relation compared to the Divine power. Kings are also compared to fathers of families; for a king is truly parens patriae [parent of the country], the politic father of his people. And lastly, kings are compared to the head of this microcosm of the body of man.[2]

Changes as Prince Phillip retires from the public eye, privacy a commandment.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

I know right , imagine being born into a caste system , especially in India say as a labour caste such as the cremation grounds keepers who are never to be touched by anyone above them in the caste system

the lowest of the low , but the most spiritual of people , they share the same life and environment with Kali Ma on the cremation grounds and so are extremely rich in my opinion
constantly being in and around the life death cycle they are truly the richest most worthy people.

Oh it would be nice if other people actually did run the country but I don't think it works that way , just because Lizzie isn't in parliament she still has her way if it comes to it but leaves these menial tasks to others because she is too busy wiping her arse with Chinese silk and eating baby fetus's to care , don't let anyone else fool you otherwise, she is the queen of the united kingdom of Britain for a reason and to think she would relinquish her absolute control is ridiculous, but of course what do I know I'm just a lowly serf !




Also what did you mean by run the country for longer than Ive been around , who you mean queen elizabeth aye she is an old coot !

I was born in 82 , so im 35 this year , Ive never liked royalty even as a child I could see that kings and queens were cruel , horrible people self serving egotistical holier than though hypocrits who serve no one but themselves, they kill of their own families for power for # sake.

remember the UK doesnt have a legally written constitution it's a mixture of documents, the magna carta , universal bill of rights and various other acts of parliament
but also remember that its a sovereign parliament , meaning the queen has absolute rule over any act of parliament she disagrees with , luckily for us she normally just goes along with everything , but there is nothing legally preventing her from saying NO

The Monarchy is one of the three components of Parliament (shorthand for the Queen-in-Parliament) along with Commons and Lords. In legal theory, the Queen has absolute and judicially unchallengeable power to refuse her assent to a Bill passed by the two Houses of Parliament. However, convention dictates the precise opposite and in practice she automatically gives her assent to any government Bill that has been duly passed and agreed by Parliament. Another important convention is that government ministers must have a seat in Parliament (and, in the case of the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer, specifically in the House of Commons) in order to hold office. This is a vital aspect of what is known as the ‘Westminster system of parliamentary government’, providing a direct form of executive responsibility and accountability to the legislature. - See more at: www.bl.uk...

Who in their right mind would allow a senile old man or woman out of touch with their people to make decisions affecting millions , just because they happened to be born into a royal family.

It's #ing madness , the quicker we are shot of the royals, the house of lords and our whole government and write a new constitution and create a new more solid concrete form of government for the people the better the UK will become , and sooner rather than later , its only going to get worse from here on out



Just to put things in perspective with Lizzie having absolute power and being a lovely wee old lady and benevolent ruler
when the tories axed benefits for the disabled etc and cut housing benefit and job cuts, did the queen turn round and go hang on lads , how dare you treat my lovely subjects like that ! They need support from the government not forced into poverty !

OH yeh that's right because she never has lifted a finger to stop bull# policies like that from being enforced , she is quite happy to keep that gap between the poor and the rich so long as it never spills onto her front lawn in Buckingham palace she is sound
a large proportion of people in the UK live from food banks and has the queen ever bothered to help those people ?

Aren't queens meant to look after their subjects and be a shining beacon of hope and prosperity , someone to look up to ?
why do so many people think she eats human baby fetus's and is a lizard person , because she is a royal #

a reply to: sapien82

why do so many people think she eats human baby fetus's and is a lizard person , because she is a royal #

Because there is a load of sh!t on the internet that some sad tw@ts find interesting?

In case it wasn't already linked.

www.bbc.com...

Prince Philip To Step Down From Carrying Out Royal Engagements

Looks like, at 96, Philip is retiring.

I don't blame him.

a reply to: uncommitted

All the other points in Sapiens post were pretty much accurate and in agreement with how I feel about our hereditary constitutional monarchy as well.

I'm interested, do you agree with the overwhelming bulk of the post, or just the focus on his final paragraph?