Prince Charles Tests positive

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Can anyone point out why so many celebrities, famous people, politicians and military leaders have been stricken with this thing compared to average Joe nobody

We are approaching 500k victims worldwide........I feel there are a whole lot more "Jo Nobodies" stricken than celebtities.

Your claim makes no sense whatsoever!

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: harold223

Can anyone point out why so many celebrities, famous people, politicians and military leaders have been stricken with this thing compared to average Joe nobody? Something is not right with all of this - it's almost as if it is an attack on the various establishments of more than one country, or its being used as a cover for a silent operation running in unison with what governments are telling their citizens.

I will only believe it when they die.

Strange Prince Charles's son and daughter in law moved WAAAAY over there to Canada just a while ago isn't it?

Charles drew the short straw to play fake patsie me thinks because he is the biggest wimp of the royal family.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: harold223
Can anyone point out why so many celebrities, famous people, politicians and military leaders have been stricken with this thing compared to average Joe nobody?

It's like 20 big names out of 463,000+ people.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: one4all
DNA is irrelevant. As an old student of History, I'm fully aware that there's no such thing as "rightful monarch.
English kings were originally, in case of doubt, elected (by the nobility). I could quote many examples from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
The current legal situaltion is that the "rightful" monarch is whatever person is so chosen by Parliament. To be specific, that means the succession is governed by the Act of Settlemet of 1700. Or do I mean 1701? This being the case, it would not matter of a million people came forward with what they thought was a better "claim by blood". Nobody has any claim by blood.

What you postulate is impossible.... the issue at hand is where true genetic continuity was artificially interfered with...and oh yes Friend there is a Template that shop us us exactly when and where that happened....with genetic evidence that is indisputable.

a reply to: one4all
I'm not postulating anything except the historical fact that kings were originally chosen as leaders by the people they were going to lead. I can say that because I've read enough history to be familiar with the processes. What is supposed to be impossible about that?

The idea that certain people have a "right" to rule only ever came from the imagination. There is nothing impossible about imagination failing to match historical reality.

Hope his young lil ho's

still get paid...

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
putting on my " brutal pragmatists " cap

i hope he dies from N19COVID complications

this opinion is not borne of any ill will

i am a monarchist .

but - the death of charles - before the queen - will with one last breath - usher in a clean page - for the reigh of his son as king william v .

charles has acheived a lot - as PoW - there is little of any great magnitude - he will accomplish as king

realistic munkie - being realistic

You guys need a new King Arthur. Not Charles or William or George or Alfred or even Edwards. Forget the Saxons. They were never your friends.

a reply to: makemap

moistend bints handing out swords - is not a model for good governence

appologies - i CBA googling the real quote