Royalist Nutter in ED (Lounged)

[snorky]

So which one of you has given the mysterious nutter my address ? you know, the one who posts up hand typed Monarchist bollck sheets at the ED Station & ramdomly around the Lane ?

one arrived this week via post - nicely headed with a union jack & some half reasoned 2 page logic about restoring the monarchy to rule the country like in the old days

Grrrrr

I will be no be defacing your hand posted A4 sheets whenever I see them. with very bad words probabaly.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Divine Right of Kings, Snorky. They know where you live.

[snorky]

Snorky acres has always been a hotbed of non aligned revolution and agitation.

If you are reading this Royalist lackey- it was ME who was driving the White fiat uno in Paris & I have to get the full set before I die - there are plently left.

[jrussel]

I don't really think that a tragic car accident is the sort of thing to be making jokes about, regardless of one's views about the monarchy.

[snorky]

tragic fr the family, yes Im sure.

Tragic for me as well - they cancelled the Newcastle / Liverpool game because of it

Tragic for the country, as it reinstated these parasites as national treasures, juset when people were begining to see what they really were.

But this isnt exactly ED related

[????]

Good for florists mind

[????]

..and, of course, the bald, short sighted pub singer

[jrussel]

I would be interested to know what your definition of a "parasite" is.

snorky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> tragic fr the family, yes Im sure.

>

> Tragic for me as well - they cancelled the

> Newcastle / Liverpool game because of it

>

> Tragic for the country, as it reinstated these

> parasites as national treasures, juset when people

> were begining to see what they really were.

>

> But this isnt exactly ED related

[????]

I think the utterly useless Prince Charles would tick most boxes...

[jrussel]

And why would that be?

[????]

...where do we start? Perhaps it would be easier if you could say what Prince Charles contributes....

[EDOldie]

Dear Snorkey,

We are subjects, not citizens as those nasty politicians would have you beleive. The Queen owns us and all the land we walk on and the houses we live in. If you die without leaving a will and you have no next of kin it all reverts to the Crown.

Democracy is a sham, elections are phoney. The poor sod who puts these stupid notices up hasn't got a clue. The monarchy are in complete control. Always will be, unless we abolish it and have a proper republic.

Which leads to the next question, who would be the president? Assuming, of course we retain parliment anda prime minister. Er, Neil Kinnock? Mrs T? Lord Coe? Peter Mandleson?

Personally, I'd rather stick with Liz. May not be perfect but at least you know where you are.

[BJL]

EDOldie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Which leads to the next question, who would be the

> president? Assuming, of course we retain parliment

> anda prime minister. Er, Neil Kinnock? Mrs T? Lord

> Coe? Peter Mandleson?

>

> Personally, I'd rather stick with Liz. May not be

> perfect but at least you know where you are.

I've never understood the logic behind this question when used as a defence of monarchy.

It suggests that the only choice is between (a) an unelected monarch and (b) an elected figure of fun/scorn/hate etc - and nothing else. How do all the other elected democracies in the world manage?

[EDOldie]

Not terribly well.

[EDOldie]

Not terribly well. I

[EDOldie]

Not terribly well.But

[EDOldie]

Not terribly well.But thats

[EDOldie]

Not terribly well.But thats the

[EDOldie]

Not terribly well.But thats the point

[jrussel]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ...where do we start? Perhaps it would be easier

> if you could say what Prince Charles

> contributes....

Well, as you are the one making the unpleasant accusations against him, I think the onus is on you to back them up with something.

What exactly do you mean by "contributes"? It's hard to answer the question without knowing. Do you feel he "contributes" less than the average person in this country?

[Huguenot]

Interesting one this...

Hypothetically if they ceased to be monarchs, that still wouldn't give the nation any greater right to their properties than any other established hereditary family.

However, under the Civil List, the royal family gives up their Crown Estate revenue in return for parliament paying their expenses.

Since the revenue from the Crown Estates is just under ?200m, and the Civil List only amounts to ?12m, then tax payers receive a net return of ?188m per annum for retaining the royal family.

Despite cynicism inside our borders, you could argue that a vast proportion of GB Plc.'s revenues are influenced by the reputation for tradition and stability that the royal family confers on us abroad - far in excess of that paltry ?12m these guys cost us.

[Keef]

I too was saddened at the loss of the Liverpool Newcastle match! It was also tragic because one of Elton John's best songs got ruined! I don't really mind them though, don't really think about them to be honest.

[Brendan]

EDOldie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Which leads to the next question, who would be the

> president?

Why is there this assumption that a country needs a leader? I personally think all a country should need is a competent administration.

[snorky]

jrussel Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > ...where do we start? Perhaps it would be

> easier

> > if you could say what Prince Charles

> > contributes....

>

> Well, as you are the one making the unpleasant

> accusations against him, I think the onus is on

> you to back them up with something.

>

> What exactly do you mean by "contributes"? It's

> hard to answer the question without knowing. Do

> you feel he "contributes" less than the average

> person in this country?

I know what you are saying and I am not one to vent my anger on a lot for the misdeeds of their forears.Usually.But this lot have had a very good run considering they do nothing and their moneymaking "brand" is now property of UK Plc & in some ways, they are employees now.

I dont advocate execution, as its not in my nature, but repossesion of their lands & estates would be a good start

Thye can keep their crowns & vulgar gilded tat and decamp to the antidelivual vile tax havens of Isle of Man & the Channel islands if they dont like it

Maybe not logical, but this family line have been responsible for Millions of deaths over the years & their opulent soft furnishings are soaked in the blood of countless vitims across the globe

I dont want to put them on a LA estate in BOlton, but let them have a town house & 1 country retreat for their use.

I hear the South of France & Switzerland provide resting places for deposed dictators and various royals , so they should have some kindred spirtits to wile away their leisure time

Bye Bye Liz and good luck in your retirement

[bon3yard]

I've always hated the 'but their great for the tourist industry' argument as well. The French draw in more visitors than us each year, and they had the sense to take our demi-revolution of the 1650s through to its logical conclusion 150 years later.

Humankind will never make the next great leap forward until we throw off the security blankets of religion and/or monarchy and start to take a collective resposibility for our collective futures. The trouble is they tried all that with communism and unfortunately it didnt progress past its initial Dictatorship stage. For good or ill I think a form of communism might well be the only logical step forward and is particularly resonant in the current climate. Cor, its a toughie innit!