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.

 

God Save the Queen - of Australia, Canada, and NZ?

page: 7
8
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 

I really appreciate your contribution to the thread. I can understand your perspective, thanks for sharing it.

The link in your signature is fascinating, I wasn't aware of the issues in England and the UK. It's a shame we're not educated/informed more about the world at large here in the US. I want to be able to teach my kids better than I was taught.

Anyway, I like your perspective of the monarchy serving you, rather than vice-versa. That is probably the way I would want to look at it, if I lived there.

I'd like to be able to read more discussion about issues other members are dealing with in their countries, rather than dozens of threads about Obama and healthcare in the US...


Good luck to the English Democrats party!




posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Whine Flu
 
Please forgive my ignorance, but it'll save me a lot of time to just ask you than do the research: is there a particular political party that enjoys more Maori support than the other/s? If so, is it possible that there are reasons why somebody PTB-ish would like to see that party's supporters divided @the moment?
Is it possible that reportage about Tariana Turia is being spun to suit somebody's agenda?



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by lepracornman
 
Yeah, thats pretty much it. Consider tho that that article is 12yrs old. Her estimated £3 billion portfolio will be worth considerably more now. Especially when you consider that the secret investments of some of the worlds richest individuals are also managed by the same people. How can they not be benefitting from knowledge of exactly what each portfolio's strategy is? It is exactly as the article suggests: insider trading on a vast & impossible to scrutinise scale.
Its also worth noting that much of her material wealth, which is not subject to taxation, is in the form of land & property, which makes it ideal to be used as collateral for huge loans, which are the basis of "leveraged buyouts". So, if she wanted a company/corporation to do her bidding & straightforward bribery wasn't working, she has the option to buy a controlling share & replace the recalcitrant with someone more to her liking.
Plus the advantages of her position as regards to law, tradition, patriotism, etc.



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bunken Drum
reply to post by Whine Flu
 
Please forgive my ignorance, but it'll save me a lot of time to just ask you than do the research: is there a particular political party that enjoys more Maori support than the other/s? If so, is it possible that there are reasons why somebody PTB-ish would like to see that party's supporters divided @the moment?
Is it possible that reportage about Tariana Turia is being spun to suit somebody's agenda?


You being ignorant? Nonsense, I feel it's I that's the ignorant one here. When it comes to some matters that don't concern me too much I end up having tunnel vision, so to speak.


That womans agenda is just, I dunno to be honest. All I know is her presence is there to just make look all Maoris look bad. Any party that comes into power seems to want to gain Maori support thuogh. Well, that's what I see, anyway. I'm probably completely wrong on this and other NZ'ers would have a better view on it, mainly because I just usually don't care about politics or pay attention to whats up.

The Maori Party, itself just pretty much mooches off whoever's the hot thing in parliament. It's just contradictory to their cause. Whatever that maybe.



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   
@stumason
Yeah, its true that Crown Lands & the famous castles, palaces, etc are owned by the state, but the Dutchy of Lancaster is her private property & it owns plenty of prime real estate.
Regarding what you said about the royals every day/move being planned out in our service etc. Are you serious? Sure the most high profile ones have engagements, where they travel in luxury & are wined & dined on the finest available, but they have plenty of time to themselves. A damn sight more than you or I do, that I can promise you. Just because they dont have the option to nip down the pub doesn't mean the cant fly to Switzerland for a nice evening overlooking the old exclusive piste on a whim.
Btw, I agree its outrageous that devolution has left England out. I'm really in favour of the Northern Assembly idea: as far as I can tell the Westminster parliament already does its best to look after the south 1st!
Strange about the link. I didn't subscribe to anything, it just popped up in a dogpile search. Try this:
BOEN Ltd Hansard
This link contains much of the article I posted before, just slightly altered & in more ranting style. It also conflates the Queen with the state in an unnecessarily confusing/stupid way, but the stuff about RTZ uranium price fixing etc is accurate.
www.sxolsout.org.uk...
Ooh, you'll love it



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Whine Flu
 
Actually, I did look the woman up in the end. Seems she was a Labour MP & non-Cabinet Minister. Then left to form the Maori Party over the Foreshore & Seabed Act & whaddaya know? Next election, Labour lost to a coalition including the Maori Party in which she's also a Minister!
I had a quick look @the National Party that lead the coalition. Seems they would be more the kind of govt TPTB would prefer, no?
Not that I'm saying our thief-in-chief did actually bring that about, just that she could have & we'd be none the wiser.
Do you know anything about Tariana Turia's business connections?



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 08:52 PM
link   
National is definitely a TPTB party. The media last year, leading up to the election, had been biased against Labour for a while and this lead a lot of people to vote for National. Which wasn't that great.

As for her business connections, I'd have no clue.



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Whine Flu
 
Yeah, our media are doing the same thing now against our Labour Party. Not that they aren't a bunch of wanchors (nods to stumason
), but it seems people have already forgotten what a bunch of sleazy, corruption-peddling, education & health underinvesting, boom & bust mongers the Conservative Party were. We're supposed to believe that its an all new shiny dreamticket with David Cameron. Except the constituency party are still the same as are many of the parliamentary party. Not once have they ever acknowledged that their monetarist policies are what wrecked our economy in the 80s & 90s. What makes that even more absurd & scary is that they're the same policies the US neocons screwed up the USA with.

We're going to get it so hard up the rear when they get back in... I had an uncle emigrated to NZ, but he died before I ever met him. Maybe I'll come over there myself! I dont believe its possible for a Party to be much worse than our Conservatives, outside the USA anyway



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Bunken Drum
 


Ah yes, her land ownership does ring a bell, I knew it did. i'm not sure if she attends the Belderburg Group. I believe someone from the royal Family does. But that does make sense.

I just find it hard to relate this to New Zealand, any sort of massive intervention into a company here, usually is heavily watched by the government, Auckland Airport is a fantastic example, overseas investors, wanting to capitalize on New Zealands biggest gateway to the wold.

Another one would be Chinese Investors wanting to buy the power grid around the capital Wellington. I believe Aunty Helen frowned upon this, but it faded away some what after New Zealand got he free trade deal with the Chinese.

But I have never heard of the queens spilling out some dosh for a company here, well, not that of recently. Rakon, New Zealands high tech super giant, might be an interesting one to look into. I recall them supplying technology to the Americans for bombs, the GPS guidance ,mechanisms or some jizzy like that. Quite funny how the public was not notified of this hehe. While Aunty Helen condemned the war, while they were doing this... mmmm seems fishy.





Rakon is a leading supplier of crystals and oscillators used in demanding applications such as GPS, where Rakon estimates it has over 50 percent of the global GPS market


Rakon - About Us

Interesting how the public are unaware of this company.. heh.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 04:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunken Drum
@stumason
Yeah, its true that Crown Lands & the famous castles, palaces, etc are owned by the state, but the Dutchy of Lancaster is her private property & it owns plenty of prime real estate.


That's her private Land and has been for centuries. Same as the Duchy of Cornwall. Unless you want to go down the road of some Zimbabwean land reform mess, then what's hers is hers. The Monrachy owns nowhere near the amount of land it once did, however.


Originally posted by Bunken Drum
Regarding what you said about the royals every day/move being planned out in our service etc. Are you serious? Sure the most high profile ones have engagements, where they travel in luxury & are wined & dined on the finest available, but they have plenty of time to themselves. A damn sight more than you or I do, that I can promise you. Just because they dont have the option to nip down the pub doesn't mean the cant fly to Switzerland for a nice evening overlooking the old exclusive piste on a whim.


The leading Royals Diaries are constantly full of engagements and not all are big state dinners. Many are little trips here and there to open this, or the dedicate that. After a few hundred times, I'd imagine that gets boring. Having to meet all those people, be polite, even if the guy you've been sent to meet is a vicious Dictator who rapes babies, who cares, his country has stuff we want, so off you go Liz, go rustle us up some business.

The only time the Queen actually gets to go where she wants is the couple of weeks at Christmas where she goes to Balmoral. Other than that, she isn't free to do bugger all, not least "fly of the Switzerland" on a whim.


Originally posted by Bunken Drum
Btw, I agree its outrageous that devolution has left England out. I'm really in favour of the Northern Assembly idea: as far as I can tell the Westminster parliament already does its best to look after the south 1st!


No! No! No! Don't fall for the EU sponsored line of English Regionalisation! They aim to break England up so we can be carried into the EU supersate with President Tony without a fight. Unless that is what you want, but I certainly don't remember voting to be part of a Union.

As an Englishman, I'd be happy for any future English parliament to be outside London. We're just as ignored outside London as you Northern chaps! Maybe York, or Winchester?


Originally posted by Bunken Drum
Strange about the link. I didn't subscribe to anything, it just popped up in a dogpile search. Try this:
BOEN Ltd Hansard
This link contains much of the article I posted before, just slightly altered & in more ranting style. It also conflates the Queen with the state in an unnecessarily confusing/stupid way, but the stuff about RTZ uranium price fixing etc is accurate.
www.sxolsout.org.uk...


I'll have a squizz


reply to post by eMachine
 



Hey, thanks
. Yeah, the UK is pretty effed up right now, not least England which has effectively been disenfranchised by Labour while paying for the provincials to have free-everything.

The SNP in Scotland, for example, are always banging on about independence, but only the other week they came begging to the UK Government asking for more money to build a bridge, even though it's a devolved matter.

Maybe if they didn't blow all their money on Free-Univeristy (which England doesn't have thanks to Scottish MP's voting for "top-up" fees) or free prescriptions (which are funded in part by English tax revenue), they wouldn't have to come begging for more money to build a bridge no-one wants.

Anyway, rant over, I don't want to bore you! Feel free to U2U me if you have any other questions


[edit on 6/9/09 by stumason]



posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 03:42 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


You must be living in a dream world if you think the Monarchy exist to serve the people and that we control them. Back in the real world they exist for one reason and that is to screw us for everything they can get. It seems you have way too much faith in British law, the same law that the Queen flushed down the toilet when she signed the Lisbon Treaty and did so without consulting the people. So much for being servants of the people.
We control them, I don't think so.




Queen Elizabeth II and the Royal Family cost the British taxpayer 69p per person last year - an increase of 3p, Buckingham Palace accounts have revealed. The total cost of keeping the monarchy increased by £1.5 million to £41.5 million during the 2008-09 financial year.


en.mercopress.com...

news.bbc.co.uk...

It appears that the tax payers are the biggest contributors to charitable organisations, specifically one that calls itself the British Monarchy.



[edit on 7-9-2009 by kindred]



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by mulberryblueshimmer
Wont happen. Mabo is based on native title on areas of land that have been continuously occupied by the original tribes. Not many of them left. Mind you , it would be a laugh for someone to try and claim back Sydney.....


My point is that the legal jurisdiction of all legislation in Australia, including native title, stems from the original 'terra nullius' claim of sovereignty by the crown.

Now that the Mabo decision has extinguished this in a formal court the government and the courts (and the crown) now have no basis with which to prove their legal right to sovereignty over the entire continent.

Regardless of their being any indigenous people involved the fact remains that the crown is not the sovereign of 'Australia'.

It is just law and they don't particularly care about it (cause they've got an army) but pleading 'no jurisdiction' on this basis rather than 'guilty' or 'not guilty' will sometimes confuse/annoy them enough to throw you out of the court rather than prove their illegitmacy.

I hope that makes sense.



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 04:37 AM
link   
Too bad the real ruler of the British Crown lives in Australia, and the one you think is the real ruler of England (the Windsors) are a bunch of thieves.

www.theage.com.au...

Just think....if thieves can steal an entire monarchy and dupe so many people, what other group of people could be stealing a birthright and making settlements where they shouldn't? Hmmm.....



[edit on 8-9-2009 by Archon_Adept]



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by eMachine
This is disappointing to me, because these three countries were my top picks for places I could move to, if I decide to flee from the US. My hopes are crushed now.


I don't see why you'd be disappointed, to be honest. Canada, NZ and Oz are beautiful countries with some incredibly friendly people with a very high quality of life. I can certainly vouch for Canada in that respect.


As many have pointed out, the Queen is virtually nothing more than symbol of another "time and era". She (or perhaps 'he' soon!) doesn't actually wield any real power over anyone.

I wouldn't let our Monarch stop you from relocating to any of those countries if you really wanted to.



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by noonebutme
 

Thanks.


I've long admired these countries, especially New Zealand. I've been writing to a friend in Auckland for more than a decade and I can't count how many times he's told me I should move there when I'm griping about the US.

Likewise, a friend of mine in Edmonton has been advising me to move to Canada.

Then there is an Australian kid that I played an online game with for about a year before I found out he was only a teenager. The kids there seem to be a bit more mature than our American teens. Since I have kids who will one day be teenagers, that made me feel like Australia might be a nice place to raise them to be reasonable adults.

I was just amazed this little fact never came to my attention before. Still, it's one of few 'cons' and there are still many 'pros'. I can't afford to move anywhere at the current time, but I'm not completely ruling out the prospect for the future.

Thanks everyone for offering your perspectives and yet more information I didn't have previously. There's so much we don't learn in school here...



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Ok so I'm too drunk right now to reply properly to the thread. However, as perspective, I'd like to add this:

God save the Queen
the fascist regime,
they made you a moron
a potential H-bomb.
God save the Queen
she ain't no human being.
There is no future
in England's dreaming
Don't be told what you want
Don't be told what you need.
There's no future
there's no future
there's no future for you
God save the Queen
we mean it man
we love our queen
God saves
God save the Queen
'cos tourists are money
and our figurehead
is not what she seems
Oh God save history
God save your mad parade
Oh Lord God have mercy
all crimes are paid.
When there's no future
how can there be sin
we're the flowers
in the dustbin
we're the poison
in your human machine
we're the future
you're future
God save the Queen
we mean it man
we love our queen
God saves
God save the Queen
we mean it man
there is no future
in England's dreaming
No future
no future for you
no future for me
Sex Pistols
Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols (1977)

Oh dear, it seems that even 32yrs ago some people were aware of the problems which have contributed to our current mess. Oh well, commence with the criticising of the personal shortcomings of the various band members... after all, its traditional to attack the messenger.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 02:00 AM
link   
From a NZ perspective, I think we are too small and weak to mess things up so bad as to force the hand of the Queen. Otherwise there'd be no point in her doing anything with her inherited power over our Government. She never even visits this country and her influence is completely invisible.

She is on our money and the Union Jack is on our flag. We choose to stay in the Commonwealth because we like it, we still feel very British as a nation because we don't really have a national identity of our own yet - unless you are Maori, but I'm of German-English descent. We kiwis tend to have a longing to visit England/UK & Ireland; it's seen as a motherland to us, and so in our British-ness and our affinity towards the UK, we tend to like the Royals as well. I'm sure this is why we tend to identify internationally as part of the commonwealth.

We like it.

[edit on 23-9-2009 by Welfhard]



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Welfhard
 


AAARGH! Welf,

I am very angry with you. We DO have a national identity. We are KIWIS. And the queen could not care less, so what does that tell you?

Why our government does not break away from the queen I do not know.

It is obvious you are not a natural born Kiwi. But hi anyway - kiwis are friendly.


I



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunken Drum
Ok so I'm too drunk right now to reply properly to the thread. However, as perspective, I'd like to add this:

God save the Queen
.
God save the Queen

Sex Pistols
Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols (1977)

Oh dear, it seems that even 32yrs ago some people were aware of the problems which have contributed to our current mess. Oh well, commence with the criticising of the personal shortcomings of the various band members... after all, its traditional to attack the messenger.


Ok cool Glen matlock looked out of place in the band with his garish shirts and it was sigh of relief when a bare chested Sid Joined.Steve jones and paul cook nicked lots of other musicians gear and Johnny was always rotten and even worse now in butter adverts or his jungle exploits!

Great band by the way
Steve Jones rules

That song was perfect publicity from using the queens silver jubilee in 1977,and the barge boat lip syncing gig up the thames recieved lots of attention too with the boys in blue trying to stop it.

Had to hand it to malcolm,he new how to court the media and earn some good beer money



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by spellbound
reply to post by Welfhard
 


AAARGH! Welf,

I am very angry with you. We DO have a national identity. We are KIWIS. And the queen could not care less, so what does that tell you?

Why our government does not break away from the queen I do not know.

It is obvious you are not a natural born Kiwi. But hi anyway - kiwis are friendly.


Firstly I don't agree that we do have a national identity at all. Most of what our national identity seems to be borrowed from the Maori in which case, it's their national identity and not mine because I am not Maori.

I am a natural born Kiwi actually, 3rd generation, born in Gore. My more traditional appealing to Europeans' (I refuse to call us Pakeha even) cultural roots in Britain as a major part of our identity is very common in my experience.

We aren't yet old enough as a nation to have formed a unique national identity as one mixed race people. I tell you this, when we do manage to, we wont be continually misidentified by the wider world as f-ing Australians all the damn time!


And the queen could not care less, so what does that tell you?

It tells me that she doesn't actually care about much more than her Corgis (spelling?) or her ludicrously expensive race horse, Thug Hunter. She's basically an icon of our relationship with England, which is an important part of our history as a nation.

[edit on 23-9-2009 by Welfhard]



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join