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.

 

Buckingham Palace announcement: Staff 'summoned to emergency meeting’ on Queen and Philip

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 03:47 AM
link   
a reply to: dianajune

Why do we need a thread reporting that the appalling Daily Express said that the risible Daily Star said that the royals like to tell their staff that every announcement they make is super important again?

Something may come of the afternoon's meeting, such as an ammended menu for high tea or even an engagement, but wtf is ats discussing such speculative crappy tabloid #e for?

If there was a death you think they tell the staff first? Maybe plan a meeting for later while hoping no one notices?

Cos royals love their staff so much?

Cant we just throw them on a big fire instead and be done with this?

And stop reading the express.




posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 03:58 AM
link   
Well, another over-egged false alarm.

'nuff said.



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 04:16 AM
link   
The word 'Sources' always gets me a little peeved. Especially when it comes from the rags we call newspaper's in the U.K. The headline sounded interesting, but when it comes from the Daily Star, I didn't put much stock into it.

The Queen see's it as her duty to the people and to god not to step down. The ONLY reason I could possibly see her step down would be if Philip passed away.

I've not heared anything over here yet though.

As for the staff. They pay them a very very low wage to do what they do. They couldn't give 2 hoots about them.
edit on Sat, 25 Nov 2017 04:18:05 -06000417112017000000k by rhynouk because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 04:36 AM
link   
a reply to: rhynouk

The Queen saved the public from Charlie boy. No one wanted him to be the next King.

I think Diana would be laughing right now knowing her cheating Husband lost his crown. : )

I think the Queen will pass it off to her Grandson William soon. This could be the leading up to that. That's my feeling.
edit on 25-11-2017 by Sapphire because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 04:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sapphire
a reply to: rhynouk

The Queen saved the public from Charlie boy. No one wanted him to be the next King.

I think Diana would be laughing right now knowing her cheating Husband lost his crown. : )

I think the Queen will pass it off to her Grandson William soon. This could be the leading up to that. That's my feeling.


I agree. The country warms to William a million times more than it does to Charles. Although I'm not sure how it works. Can she by-pass Charles and go straight to William?

What the country doesn't need is it's Queen dying while on the throne. That would cause chaos. Steps are being taken I think for something big to be announced soon.



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sapphire
I think the Queen will pass it off to her Grandson William soon.


That's not how the law of succession works. There is more to the monarchy than the person who wears the crown.



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:03 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

Someone is. Charles should have been the successor should he have not?



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: rhynouk
I agree. The country warms to William a million times more than it does to Charles. Although I'm not sure how it works. Can she by-pass Charles and go straight to William?

It's not her choice. The succession is automatic, on rules decided by Act of Parliament more than two centuries ago.

What the country doesn't need is it's Queen dying while on the throne. That would cause chaos. Steps are being taken I think for something big to be announced soon.

Monarchs have always died on the throne in the past, with very rare exceptions, and no royal death since 1714 (when the succession to Anne was disputable) has even threatened to cause chaos. "The king is dead- long live the king!" Also known as "The king never dies".
edit on 25-11-2017 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sapphire
Someone is. Charles should have been the successor should he have not?


Yes, Charles is next in line. Royal succession is not some beauty contest.



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

I should hope not, or they would all fail miserably.

reprise: all but Lady Di, William and Kate.
edit on 25-11-2017 by Sapphire because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

I do believe, the Queen has stated her Grandson William is the next King.



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Sapphire
If she had been heard saying that, the fact would have been headline news already.
But she knows very well that she doesn't have the legal right to say anything of the kind, and therefore she can't have said it.
Th idea is a wish-fulfilment fantasy.



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sapphire
reprise: all but Lady Di, William and Kate.


Diana was never in a line of succession. She would never had been a queen, even in name.



I do believe, the Queen has stated her Grandson William is the next King


I think that'd false. The Queen would not make such a false assertion. Even the monarchy has to abide by the law.



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:18 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

My response was in response to yours:


Yes, Charles is next in line. Royal succession is not some beauty contest.



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:19 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

Thank you for your kind response Disraeli.



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:20 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi


I think that'd false. The Queen would not make such a false assertion. Even the monarchy has to abide by the law.


Is it? Really?



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:21 AM
link   
According to a new report, reigning monarch Queen Elizabeth, 89, has named her 33-year-old grandson — not her eldest son and next heir to the throne, Prince Charles, 67 — as her royal successor.
www.closerweekly.com...



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Sapphire
January the 16th 2016 is not a new report (not now, anyway), and a declaration of that kind would have been headline news in more reliable sources.
Let me repeat- she does not have the legal right to do it, she knows she does not have the legal right to do it, and therefore she has never talked about doing it.
I


edit on 25-11-2017 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:34 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

Your such a gentleman compared to most, thank you for making me feel welcome.



posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 05:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Sapphire

Well, you need to think about where you are picking up these stories. Do you really think that website is credible? The author of the article is after all an "entertainment journalist".

So, no. The Queen would not, and cannot, nominate their heir to the throne. That's not the law.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join