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.

 

Police Concern Over Royal Wedding Protests

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by SprocketUK
As for HMTQ not being the richest woman...ridiculous. She owns everything in the UK. She is the law, so there is nowt she can't have.


Now, you are talking out of your bottom. If you were to research the subject you would find that the monarch does not own everything and this has not the case since King John, if it ever was.

To topic. I would hope that the disaffected buffoons from all sides, not just the EDL and the MAC, but also the so called anarchists (rich kids who like smashing things up) and all the rest just stay at home.

They can protest elsewhere. The MAC could go to Iran where they can sample Shari as victims because the local authorities would probably take offense, the anarchists to Monaco to their yachts and the EDL back to under their stones.

It’s a wedding.

Regards




posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by paraphi
 


Now who's talking out of their bottom?

A lot of the anarchists tend to be working class and not 'rich kids' - although I daresay there are some. If you're going to tell people to do some research, then I politely suggest you do the same.

But yes, I agree with your above points



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


Yes, I am sure they are. I am merely basing this on my personal experience and crude generalisations. It would be true to say that in the recent spate of vandalism in London by (so called) anarchists, they were difficult to see due to the vast numbers of press.

As an aside and slightly off topic, I know.

Q - How many anarchists does it take to change a light bulb?
A - None. Anarchists cannot change a thing!

or

Q - How many anarchists does it take to change a light bulb?
A - The light bulb cannot be changed - it can oly be smashed!

Regards



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by paraphi
 


Well yes i can't dispute your experiences, but I know a good hand full of anarchists and they're mainly lower class - guess it depends on location maybe.

Lol @ your jokes


Peace



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by paraphi
 


I don't know what Disney version of British history you have been reading, but king John has nowt to do with it, mate.
Every law in this country is enforced on behalf of the crown. Whatever the crown wants, the crown gets.

There are a few levels of make believe between us proles and the crown, but they are just window dressing.
It is impossible for the Queen to break the law, because, as far as it goes, she is the law.
She could chop up every member of the England cricket team and feed them to her corgies, and the only laws she would have broken would be foreign ones. (like the EU and UN human rights laws).

Each of her subjects only holds their property and liberty at the sufferance of the crown.
Hell, even the government we elect is only in power once the queen invites the party with the most votes to form a government. (she could ask anyone, no matter how many votes they got, if she wished, she could ask the monster raving looney party...actually, it seems like she has).

Now, I'm not saying the Queen would do anything like take all your property, but she does have that power and much more. If you think she doesn't, then you are misunderstanding our system of government entirely.

And as far as demos go...I just hope the EDL go to hell, I'm English and those fascist idiots are certainly not sticking up for my culture or way of life in the slightest.
edit on 26-4-2011 by SprocketUK because: addendum

edit on 26-4-2011 by SprocketUK because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Wulfric
 


The Muslims Against Crusades are requesting suggestions as to what to write on their placards for their hate crusade.





Breaking "news" They've cancelled the protest because they've been "tipped off" about an imminent large scale attack! (you gotta laugh at these guys!)


Press Release for MAC Cancellation Press Release dated 27th April 2011 On 29th of April 2011, plans for a forceful demonstration by Muslims against Crusades outside Westminster Abbey were due to take place to highlight the brutal crusade being launched at the behest of the tyrannical British government and royal family. Careful plans were laid out in order to inflict maximum damage both to the reputation of the Crusader and Nazi prince William as well as Queen Elizabeth II and the British government in general. Unfortunately, it is has recently come to our attention, from the sincere advice of reputable Muslim scholars and activists such as Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad and Sheikh Anjem Choudary, that the threat of an imminent attack against those attending the royal wedding on 29th April 2011, is too strong to substantiate the presence of any Muslims within the locality. In light of this, Muslims against Crusades, would like to announce that in line with the very real possibility of a large scale attack on British soil, that we are left with no other alternative but to cancel the planned demonstration on 29th April 2011. We hereby call all Muslims in Britain and abroad not to attend the royal wedding and in particular to avoid all public transport leading to areas such as Westminster, Buckingham Palace, Piccadilly Circus, St James's Station and Victoria; we would also like to stress that the cause for the current security threat against Britain is directly linked to the bloody foreign policy of the tyrannical British government, and that Muslims cannot be held responsible for any carnage caused in reaction to such unwarranted oppression.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by iWokeUp
... Queenie is the ritchest woman in the world and yet she insists that the public fund her grandsons wedding ? Its discusting if you ask me. ...


Actually, and with the greatest respect, the Queen is not the richest woman in the world and far from it. The wealth of the Royal Family is well publicised, as is their income.

You are probably falling into the trap of believing websites and other sources who think the Queen owns things like the roadside verges, riverbeds and the seabed, not to mention the sky and the dominions including the US and Texas. The Crown Estate is an odd arrangement and is not managed by the Queen – or owned by the Queen as such. The value of the Crown Estate is only around £6bn and revenues go to the Treasury.

I hate to rely on Wikipedia for anything, but here’s a list of rich women. Quite correctly, the Queen is not on that list.

Richest Women fro Wikipedia


Originally posted by iWokeUp
And yes i will be watching the wedding on friday, BUT only to see if Queenie falls out of the horse drawn open topped carrage and falls flat on her face !


I sincerely hope that you don’t electrocute shaving yourself or choak on your donut while watching.

Regards


ACTUALLY.....the 'crown estate' only refers to her wealth within the United Kingdom !
crown estate-wiki - as you are going by Wikipedia !




The Crown Estate is one of the largest property owners in the United Kingdom with a portfolio worth £6.2 billion, with urban properties valued at £4 billion, and rural holdings valued at £972 million; and an annual profit of £210.7 million, as at 15 July 2010. The majority of the estate by value is urban, including a large number of properties in central London, but the estate also owns 107,000 ha (260,000 acres) of agricultural land and forest, more than 55% of the UK's foreshore, and retains various other traditional holdings and rights, for example Ascot racecourse and Windsor Great Park.


There are several links that will take you to the Queens wealth, if you care to do your research....Although it is shrouded in secrecy !
Who owns the world?




“Queen Elizabeth II the largest landowner on Earth.” Queen Elizabeth II, head of state of the United Kingdom and of 31 other states and territories, is the legal owner of about 6,600 million acres of land, one sixth of the earth’s non ocean surface. She is the only person on earth who owns whole countries, and who owns countries that are not her own domestic territory. This land ownership is separate from her role as head of state and is different from other monarchies where no such claim is made – Norway, Belgium, Denmark etc. The value of her land holding. £17,600,000,000,000 (approx).


Further more..




This makes her the richest individual on earth. However, there is no way easily to value her real estate. There is no current market in the land of entire countries. At a rough estimate of $5,000 an acre, and based on the sale of Alaska to the USA by the Tsar, and of Louisiana to the USA by France, the Queen’s land holding is worth a notional $33,000,000,000,000 (Thirty three trillion dollars or about £17,600,000,000,000). Her holding is based on the laws of the countries she owns and her land title is valid in all the countries she owns. Her main holdings are Canada, the 2nd largest country on earth, with 2,467 million acres, Australia, the 7th largest country on earth with 1,900 million acres, the Papua New Guinea with114 million acres, New Zealand with 66 million acres and the UK with 60 million acres.


And so....


She is the world’s largest landowner by a significant margin. The next largest landowner is the Russian state, with an overall ownership of 4,219 million acres, and a direct ownership comparable with the Queen’s land holding of 2,447 million acres. The 3rd largest landowner is the Chinese state, which claims all of Chinese land, about 2,365 million acres. The 4th largest landowner on earth is the Federal Government of the United States, which owns about one third of the land of the USA, 760 million acres. The fifth largest landowner on earth is the King of Saudi Arabia with 553 million acres


Queen Elizabeth II Largest land owner on Earth.

Personality and image of Queen Elizabeth II - Wiki



In a 2006 book, Who Owns the World: The Hidden Facts Behind Landownership, Kevin Cahill claimed that Queen Elizabeth II holds ownership of one sixth of the land on the Earth's surface, more than any other individual or nation. This amounts to a total of 6.6 billion acres (10.3 million mi² or 27 million km²) in 32 countries.


Kevin Cahill (Author) - Who owns the world - Wiki

Monarchy of Canada - Wiki

Queen of Papua New Guinea - Wiki

Monarchy of New Zealand - Wiki


So i conclude..
Monarchy of the United Kingdom - Wiki



From 1603, when the Scottish King James VI inherited the English throne as James I, both kingdoms were ruled by a single monarch. From 1649 to 1660, the tradition of monarchy was broken by the republican Commonwealth of England that followed the War of the Three Kingdoms. The Act of Settlement 1701, which is still in force, excluded Roman Catholics, or those married to Catholics, from succession to the English throne. In 1707, the kingdoms of England and Scotland were merged to create the Kingdom of Great Britain and, in 1801, the Kingdom of Ireland joined to create the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. The British monarch became nominal head of the vast British Empire, which covered a quarter of the world's surface at its greatest extent in 1921.


Wiki only used to prove a point. One can find many many more sites with info on the Queen and her twisted family. You have your oppinion on the Royal family, and so do i...BUT it seems my oppinion out does yours..
80% of Brits dont care about the Royal wedding - YouTube news link


And further more...I dont use an electric razor nor do i eat donuts....

Enjoy your day.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mike_A
reply to post by iWokeUp
 



Queenie is the ritchest woman in the world


As already pointed out, no she’s not. Forbes gives that title to Christy Walton with approximately $26bn


and yet she insists that the public fund her grandsons wedding ?


No she isn’t, the royal family are paying for the wedding with the Middletons pitching in. The taxpayer is paying for the policing of the event but isn’t that only fair when it’s the thousands of tax payers on the street watching that's generating that cost?


Plus, why do they keep saying 'The nation loves the royals' ?


Are they? Who? Where?


And yes i will be watching the wedding on friday, BUT only to see if Queenie falls out of the horse drawn open topped carrage and falls flat on her face !


Well then you’re a c**t.

edit on 26-4-2011 by Mike_A because: (no reason given)


I have alread replied to the above poster on this subject with all my proof of what i say. Try doing some research on the British monarchy..

One for you though...80% of Brits dont care about the Royal wedding - YouTube news link

As for 'Who's saying everyone loves a Royal wedding' try watching the msm news...and the celebrities.

And as for your final comment...Mods, i thought this kind of language was not aloud on the site? I really thought it was for adults only .....Further more, do you even know what one is?



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Best regards and everyone sing along.





posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by iWokeUp
 



I have alread replied to the above poster on this subject with all my proof of what i say.


Unfortunately you’re hinging your argument on the notion of crown properties being the personal property of the monarch, it is not.

As the first paragraph of the Wikipedia link you posted states;


In the United Kingdom, the Crown Estate is a property portfolio owned by the Crown. Although still belonging to the monarch and inherent with the accession of the throne, it is no longer the private property of the reigning monarch and cannot be sold by him/her, nor do the revenues from it belong to the monarch personally. It is managed by an independent organisation headed by the Crown Estate Commissioners. The surplus revenue from the Estate is paid each year to HM Treasury. The Crown Estate is formally accountable to Parliament, to which it makes an annual report


en.wikipedia.org...

Also


in Great Britain, land owned by the crown, the income from which has been, since the reign of George III (1760–1820), surrendered to Parliament


www.britannica.com...

The notion that being the head of state of a country equates to owning all land is unsupported in any of your links and that is the only argument that is made.

The problem is the assumption that “the crown” refers to Queen Elizabeth II when in fact it most often refers to the government; both in the UK and commonwealth states.


One for you though...80% of Brits dont care about the Royal wedding - YouTube news link


Infowars and now PressTV? Don’t be too picky with your sources now...


As for 'Who's saying everyone loves a Royal wedding' try watching the msm news...and the celebrities.


I have, haven’t seen that yet (btw you said they’re saying everyone loves the royals not the royal wedding).


And as for your final comment...Mods


Diddums. You say you will watch a live event solely to see an 85 year old woman fall six feet onto her face, sound like a # to me.

edit on 27-4-2011 by Mike_A because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleDog UK
On the Muslims against Crusades website I do love the photo's at the bottom of the home page.......ha ha....

The first one holding a placard saying " Get out of our countries '.......... I couldn't have put it better myself !!

He is there standing in the UK with a placard saying 'get out of our countries'.... hmmm a case of pot calling the kettle black I think........ ha ha ha........ how ironic and also this supposed protest HOW PATHETIC !!

www.muslimsagainstcrusades.com...

[snip]

Regards

PDUK
edit on 26-4-2011 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)




well said, get out of........ hilarious, i'll even fork out for the first 5 plane flights back to Pakistan.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by kindred
 


Kindred

Why post that video / song / waste of valuable Bandwidth.....?

Does it make you feel proud or good to wish 'ill' on those in London today ??

I think you need to look at yourself and think about what it means to be a human being ...mate ???

Regards

PDUK



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Worrying disregard for freedom of speech.


edit on 30-4-2011 by CrashYourself because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by gavlar1974
reply to post by Wulfric
 
Real IRA AND CONT:IRA dont have clout of the old PROVOS but that dont mean they wont try something,think they would be caught easily no mercs they cant afford them!!!And protests well its a protest nothing more nothing less..the met police will see to that!!



Expect them to plan something for the Queen Reptilian's arrival in Eire. They have so far had some success and have stepped up their campaign.

Do not count htem out. They are planning something big, they refused the priest's mediation at this time, but didn't rule out a future time hinting that they will later, but have something planned.

I expect that to be when the Queen arrives in Eire.

This group is not hitting randomly they are very good at targeting because they know this will work against them, so not to get the public against them by taking out civilians.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by CrashYourself
 


Crashyourself

What a Dumb load of idiots, and I am not talking about the Police here...........

Why does the group (anarchists ? or whatever) JUST MOVE AWAY.............. They then carry on singing elsewhere and the Police have to move then if they want to.....

Trouble with all these incidents is that....... AS SOON AS SOMETHING happens... then the protesters get ALL AGGRESSIVE......... if they had decent leadership and some level of intelligence then by NOT REACTING but changing their positions (re-locating in Military terms) and causing uncertainty in the minds of the Police then that is ALWAYS a far more disruptive issue than charging straight for aggression........

Bunch of Fecking amateurs....... the lot of them and those on this site as well....

Regards

PDUK



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleDog UK
reply to post by CrashYourself
 


Crashyourself

What a Dumb load of idiots, and I am not talking about the Police here...........

Why does the group (anarchists ? or whatever) JUST MOVE AWAY.............. They then carry on singing elsewhere and the Police have to move then if they want to.....

Trouble with all these incidents is that....... AS SOON AS SOMETHING happens... then the protesters get ALL AGGRESSIVE......... if they had decent leadership and some level of intelligence then by NOT REACTING but changing their positions (re-locating in Military terms) and causing uncertainty in the minds of the Police then that is ALWAYS a far more disruptive issue than charging straight for aggression........

Bunch of Fecking amateurs....... the lot of them and those on this site as well....

Regards

PDUK


You mean like they did at the last riot? Using twitter to find 'safe-spots' between the police and dissolving into smaller groups and relocating and scouting. Hit and run tactics, paint bombs, road blocks.

It looked pretty intelligent to me, even if you disagree with it.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join