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.

 

Prince William to share Queen's duties: Treasury document reveals secret plan to make him the 'Sha

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Prince William to share Queen's duties: Treasury document reveals secret plan to make him the 'Shadow King'


ww w.dailymail.co.uk

The Queen is to hand over a substantial part of her public duties to Prince William to help him prepare for the day when he becomes King, according to a confidential document obtained by The Mail on Sunday

The disclosures come despite months of denials from the Palace that the Queen was planning to step back from her official work in favour of her 27-year-old grandson.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 07:53 PM
link   
It looks like Prince William will be the shadow king.

I'm not well versed in the Monarchy so why isn't Charles becoming the new king? Isn't he next in line?

I'm also sure this will get the conspiracy theories going.

I think I rember reading theories that William was the antichrist.

Here we go.

ww w.dailymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   
Good on him.

Long live the new shadow King.

I believe he will be a breath of fresh air to Britain and the commonwealth nations.



Pink Calls Prince William 'Redneck' After Fox Hunting Letter
www.digitaljournal.com...

[edit on 12-12-2009 by whiteraven]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
There are several things going on here, and alot was set into motion by the Queen years ago, and influential members of Parliment and the Church of England. When Charles was married to the Dianna, it was in hopes that they would produce royal heirs and that Prince Charles would assume the throne. However, with the muck up to the very public and nasty divorce, the damage to the British royal family was a stain that neither the Queen, Parliment or the Church of England could take. Questions as to if they would do away with the Monarchy and the establishment there of was present. However, Queen Elizabeth II, at the time as it was supected, was in the process of doing alot of negotiations to prevent this. After the divorce, it was decided, that Prince Charles would be able to marry the lady of his choice, but at a cost, the crown would go to his oldest son. The lady who Prince Charles is interested and currently married is a catholic, and I believe that it is against the laws of England for any member of the royal family to sit on the throne and be Catholic. So with the releasal of this information, it just confirms what many are thinking and suspected. I do know that if anything Prince William and Prince Henry are being nudged to marry and produce heirs, especially if one of them is to sit on the throne. So I would also say look for if not one, but 2 weddings in the future.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


Long live the King!
If the world does end because he is the antichrist, at least he was British!

wait a minute.. he will be 30/31 in 2012... the age of Jesus.. the AC will take the role of Jesus.. the Queen may be ill and it isnt public knowledge yet...

i see the queen dying by 2012(due to ill health) and him being proclaimed king he will enter politics and build a new British empire over his years of "peace" then unleash his fury on the world.

[edit on 17/05/09 by Raider of Truth]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Why isnt Chuck given the kingship?

Easy.

The people wont be loyal to him. He cheated on Lady Di.

William is the perfect choice.

He's Di's golden boy. He's got a good rep. He's military. He has a good "picture face" (not a leadership thing but good for PR).

Charles IMHO will never be accepted by the people and I thing Queen Liz will out live him in spite of it!

I'm not in the least bit English so I may be dead wrong.

[edit on 12-12-2009 by felonius]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by felonius
 


Yep all that and he is a racist elitist old duffer - he's like 62 or 65 now ain't he? Just say the Queen plods on for another 5 or 10 years (and as she seems fairly healthy for someone in her 80's) then we could of been put in a position where our new king was crowned in his 70's... Much better to have Will be king, the royal family is mostly image now a days, Chuck just aint got it.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:15 PM
link   
It is rumored when the Third Temple of Jerusalem is erected and a one world government has been created that Prince William will sit upon that throne.

It is also rumored after 43 years of waiting I will finally be getting that pony I have always wanted for Christmas.

There is far more to the Royal family than what they and others would like you to think!

It is also rumored that after 43 years of waiting for that pony I have always wanted for Christmas should it be the Royal family who gives it to me, I will never have another thing to say on this subject!

Thanks a boy pony please!



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 06:07 AM
link   
You gotta laugh at the terminology-"Shadow King"

Sounds like something from Lord of the rings..


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
It is rumored when the Third Temple of Jerusalem is erected and a one world government has been created that Prince William will sit upon that throne.

It is also rumored after 43 years of waiting I will finally be getting that pony I have always wanted for Christmas.


Some reckon Nostrodamus predicted this,but not sure If he mentioned your pony.You never know though.




posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   
And Buckingham Palace has denounced the whole story as "a total and utter fabrication".

So. That's that sorted.

The Palace has intimated often that the Queen will carry on her duties while she's capable, Charles will take over some of her duties if she's too infirm ... but Elizabeth II will remain Head of State until the day she dies.

So. The Queen is dead, God save the King & all that.

Palace denies William taking on duties from The Queen



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 07:02 AM
link   
I'd rather they just end the monarchy with Elizabeth II. Let her carry on until she dies and then no more after her, disband the whole thing. I don't think there's any place for it in a modern meritocratic society.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Agreed, this king and queen thing is a throwback to times so ancient as to be irrelevant in today's world. Who the hell wants to be subservient to anyone let alone to someone just because they were born into the family in charge?

It also grates me every time I hear someone being referred to as "lord" or "sir" such and such. Give me an effinn break already. How the Brits can choke down all that class distinction in the 21st century is beyond me.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by wayno
 



We have evolved and thrived as a social tribal society.

We as collective humanity act and teach each other using a system of top down structure.

A few times in recorded history man has formed a working society which evolved around local judges or evolved warlords with no real head of state but it seems we always migrate toward some collective top down structure.

One of the things that fascinates me is that a Queen or Female was head of State in Britain and some such as Queen Victoria had real power.

This did very little to change women rights yet it reinforced the role of women in that society.

Also i believe that Prince William seems to be measuring up to whatever it is we expect of him.

He is a mixture of the first born of the Princess, one of two grief stricken children after the accident of whom all of Britain wanted to comfort to a man who wanted to work on the front lines of Afghanistan.

He already has been knitted into part of the historical myth of the kingdom upon whom the sun never sets.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   

He already has been knitted into part of the historical myth of the kingdom upon whom the sun never sets.


So are you saying that this fairy tale (historical myth) is somehow relevant or important to life in the 21st century.

I am in Canada. Elizabeth is supposedly our queen too; however, that is in name only. Although I was born here, she means absolutely nothing to me; save a growing suspicion of how she fits in with the equally mythical NWO/PTB.

I take no comfort in concepts of kingdom or empire. Like I said, I can't understand those that do. I see myself, perhaps misguidedly, as a free and independent person as good as any other, regardless of station, class, colour, or any other distinguishing characteristic.

By the way, I feel the same way about celebrities, over whom there is probably more grovelling and ass kissing than for royalty.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by wayno
Agreed, this king and queen thing is a throwback to times so ancient as to be irrelevant in today's world. Who the hell wants to be subservient to anyone let alone to someone just because they were born into the family in charge?


They bring in alot of tourist dollars for one thing, but they are also a link to our past, culture and heritage/ What they cost is dwarfed by what they bring in.


Originally posted by wayno
It also grates me every time I hear someone being referred to as "lord" or "sir" such and such. Give me an effinn break already. How the Brits can choke down all that class distinction in the 21st century is beyond me.


Nearly all the Lord's in the House of Lords are there on merit, having been made life peers for their achievements and service to the country, not very democractic, I grant you, but they are not born into the role.

Anyone called Sir has been knighted for exactly the same reasons. Even the US General Norman Schwarzkopf has been knighted.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 

Prince William "Shadow King"? Palace Denies Report




LONDON — Buckingham Palace has denied a newspaper report that the queen is passing more of her duties to her grandson, Prince William.
Royal spokesman Miguel Head said the report that William is being groomed to be "shadow king," bypassing his father Prince Charles, is nonsense.


source


Just sayin...

peace



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by wayno
How the Brits can choke down all that class distinction in the 21st century is beyond me.


Some of us don't...
Lots of us in fact. But the problem is that it's really ingrained in our society however much we dislike it now. There are many people who will want to carry on these ridiculous traditions. There is still a weird affection for the Royal Family however, and I've heard the opinion voiced recently that they should have nothing to do with government, and basically be a tourist attraction if people really want to keep their ties to them...I'm soooo gonna get flamed for that one!
...I'm inclined to agree with that version of possible future events. Still there will be a huge influence on society by them, simply because many people are such sycophants, and the younger more glamourous members of the family are proving to be very influential in their own right. Sadly the class mentality hasn't given way totally to a genuine meritocracy just quite yet.

If there is an issue here with Charles not being king one day, then I suspect that it's to do with the Diana/Camilla issue and the affection people still hold Diana in, which will extend to her sons. Perhpas that's what the Firm might not want to damage. William as king would be a very strong figure, even if inexperienced. Constitutions can be amended and changed if need be, and protocol is not binding.




[edit on 13-12-2009 by caitlinfae]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by whiteraven
 


I agree I would much rather a King William rather than Charles, as our King. He learned a lot from his mother about how to relate to us commoners; which is more than I can say about the next in line, namely, Charles.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   
William definitely has that "it" factor that Hollywood is always after. If the monarchy is to be a tourist attraction then I would go for the pretty boy if I was you guys.

Or perhaps Harry's rogue factor would be equally appealing to tourists; especially the youth.

The gay people of the world would do a genuflect for either one. There's a good buck to be made from that crowd you know.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
The Monarchy is an abusive system of governance, that is utter tyranny.

Tourists will not stop coming if the Royal Family are removed - France has higher attendance to its palaces, and the French are a republic. And suggesting tourism is more important than are democratic rights is hilarious.

The Queen is effectively a dictator.

wayno, our colonial friend, is not even allowed to decided on Canada's constitutional status of the Monarchy - it's left to the British government. Not very democratic. It is rather humorous - from our point of view - but dear wayno is being repressed. A political prisoner, if you will...

And if you think William is the anti-Christ, predicted in the Bible, then please do not leave home or attempt to hold any significant role in society. I fear for the consequence.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join